Barnardiston king b lewis and lewis the remedy in case of embracery this be a  writ of error upon a judgement in a action for embracery give in the grand  session of Anglesey in the principality of Wales the foundation of the action  be the defendant tamper with the jury to persuade they to give a verdict for  he on action bring by he against the present plaintiff for word and the  occasion of bring it be owe to the plaintiff not be able to have any other  remedy in Wales for the plaintiff have get the defendant indict for this in  England before and be find not guilty so that in any other indictment he will  plead auterfoits acquit sergeant Whitaker say that this action be a little  hard upon that account he observe too that though a private remedy shall lie  for this offence yet it be a offence so very injurious to the public and of so  ill a example that at least the king ought to have join in the suit with the  party immediate suffer but he submit it to the court that no private action  will lie as this case be for it do not appear by the declaration that any more  damage be by this mean give than what otherwise will have be give the chief  justice say that he think a express charge of that sort will be extraordinary  in a suit of this nature for by that mean the truth of verdict will be call in  question in a different manner from what the law prescribe accord the court  seem inclinable to reverse the judgement though after a verdict but it stand  over Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b lofield and BANKCROFT how far a innuendo be necessary to  be lie in a action for a libel in a action for a libel publish in the postboy  July the declaration set forth the advertisement to the follow effect a  warrant of felony have be issue out against John lofield of such a parish this  be to give notice that whoever shall apprehend he shall receive a reward of by  I Bankcroft and now Mr Filmer move in arrest of judgement and submit it as the  declaration be lie the plaintiff can not recover he say it be not lie that the  word be speak any way relate to the plaintiff nor one innuendo to show that  they any way concern he and that this be necessary he cite cro it far insist  that the declaration can not be maintain because it be no where lie in it that  the plaintiff have not such warrant issue out against he it be likewise say  that the word faration e cup be bad notwithstanding the England pick a pocket  and for this purpose be cite keb it be urge far that the Barnardiston king b  er p action be against three joint whereas the action ought to have be several  the chief justice say he think the exception for want of a innuendo have a  good deal of weight with it accord this matter be order to stand over vide  post
Barnardiston king b lyms and ANSTIL how far the court will not discharge a  person upon common bail Mr thede move that the defendant may be discharge upon  common bail upon account of its not be ascertain in the affidavit which the  endorsement of the writ be make by what be the particular cause of action but  only in general that so much be due to the plaintiff but the fact come out to  be that after this endorsement be make a second affidavit be file of the  particular cause of action before any warrant for arrest be make out and  therefore the court think this sufficient within the intent of the statute of  Geo because this affidavit be make before the party can possible be at any  prejudice and for this reason the motion be disallow
Barnardiston king b main and somner how far the court will stay proceed in  debt upon bind in debt upon bind Mr Pilsworth move that upon bring in what be  due upon the condition with cost all proceed may be stay the court at first  doubt whether this can be do within the intent of Ann as the whole conditional  sum be not offer to be bring in however at last they grant the motion and be  the rather incline to do so because the stay proceed in this action will be no  bar to another Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b major and construction on that part of the statute of Geo  relate to bankrupt whereby it be provide that if any person be arrest for a  debt due before he become a bankrupt such bankrupt may plead that the clause  of such action do accrue before such time as he become a bankrupt in a action  of debt bring upon a judgement Mr Parker move that proceed may be stay by  reason that the defendant become a bankrupt after the commencement of the  original action though he do not before the obtain judgement in it he find  this motion upon the statute of Geo relate to bankrupt wherein there be a  clause that if any person be arrest for a debt due before he become a bankrupt  such bankrupt may plead that the cause of such action do accrue before such  time as he become a bankrupt and may give that Act in evidence now he observe  that the cause of the present action be the judgement in the former and  therefore he do agree that he can not plead that the cause of this action  accrue before the bankrupcy but he submit it that the defendant be plain  within the equity of that Act and therefore he hope the motion shall be grant  accord the court make a rule to show cause
Barnardiston king b martin and MUTFIELD when a writ of error be bring in order  to reverse a outlawry how far the court will reverse it notwithstanding the  plaintiff in error do not appear to the original action upon a writ of error  bring to reverse a outlawry Mr Dennison move that the plaintiff in error may  appear to the original action and that in the mean time proceed in this writ  of error shall be stay where a writ of error be bring to reverse a outlawry  for want of proclamation he observe that such appearance be requisite by the  express word of the statute of Elizabeth before the writ of error shall be  allow the statute of and W m provide general concern the reversal of outlawry  upon any exception whatsoever and by the authority of Carth bail must be give  to the original action upon bring the writ of error Mr strange on the other  side say he do agree that the plaintiff in error must appear to the original  action before the outlawry shall be reverse but he conceive there be no reason  why the plaintiff shall not proceed in order to reverse it without enter such  appearance in case of order of bastardy remove up by certiorari he do agree  the court will not quash the order till the party enter into a recognizance to  appear at the session but yet he say it be well know that the party may take  his exception to the order and have the opinion of the court upon they before  he enter into such recognizance the court be of the same opinion accord the  motion be refuse vide postea
Barnardiston king b Maynard and harvey how far the court will require a person  to give oyer of a writ in a to know facias against bail the defendant plead  that a capias ad to give satisfaction be sue out against the principal and  that he be take in execution on it the plaintiff counsel now say that if there  be any such writ it must be a record of this court and therefore they move  that the defendant may be oblige to give oyer of this writ and if they do not  that judgement may be enter against they and for this purpose cite a like case  of hunter and wiseman accord the court make a rule to show cause the chief  justice and judge lee absent vide post Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b Maynard and harvey vide ante this matter come now on again  upon motion to make the rule absolute the chief justice say that he do not  think that this case come up to the case of hunter and wiseman for that be of  a judgement plead of this court and there indeed the party plead the judgement  be oblige to give a note of the roll which the judgement be of otherwise the  search may be endless but writ be always upon the file and the search  therefore by no mean so difficult for which reason judge lee absent  Barnardiston king b er p the rule be discharge and the chief justice say as  this case be he do not think that the party be entitle to oyer but his remedy  be by plead nul tiel record
Barnardiston king b meed and Gibons the certainty require in a declaration by  a executor in debt on bind bring by two survive executor the defendant  demurrer special to the declaration and the principal cause rely upon be that  the plaintiff Barnardiston king b er p have only allege that the money have  not be pay to the testator in his lifetime nor to they or one of they since  his decease Mr agar now argue that this declaration be not certain enough so  as the plaintiff can recover upon it because notwithstanding any matter which  they have allege the money may have be pay to the executor that be now dead  sergeant baines on the other side answer that if it have the money will in  judgement of law have be pay to the survive executor as well as to the  executor decease for a payment to one be a payment to all the court think this  a matter proper to be far consider of but a few day after overrule the  demurrer and give judgement for the plaintiff
Barnardiston king b METSCOFFEN and gunner when a person be in custody for a  attainder of felony how far the court will not allow he to be charge with a  action Mr draper move for leave of the court to charge a person with a action  who be in custody upon a attainder on the black Act but under a reprieve the  court say if the party have be only in custody upon a bare indictment a judge  may grant such motion at his chamber but on the other hand they say if this  have be in case of a common attainder of felony they shall have think even  this court can not grant the motion because if they shall it will be a escape  in the sheriff to transport he however in the present case the chief justice  say he still do not know but this motion may be proper because the black Act  have save the good to the party and for that reason he think his good may be  liable perhaps in this way but yet the court refuse to make any rule upon this  motion cro Barnardiston king b term trin geo two
Barnardiston king b midget and Tirrel how far the court will give liberty that  a new count may be lie in the declaration in a indebitatus assumpsit the  plaintiff have deliver his declaration before the essoinday but all be in  paper and upon this Mr kettelby move for liberty to add a new count Mr Monday  say that the rule of the court be that the plaintiff shall not add a new count  after the second term be over but before the second term be over he may accord  the court make a rule to show cause and afterward make it absolute
Barnardiston king b milbourn and Stephenson how many day notice be requisite  to be give upon a writ of inquiry Mr Filmer move to set aside a writ of  inquiry which be execute at York upon account of there not be fourteen day  notice give which he say by the rule of the court they be entitle to as the  party live above forty mile from London the same he say be of notice of trial  but the court observe that there be but eight day notice requisite as the writ  be not execute in London or Middlesex
Barnardiston king b mile and WOLSHAM when a to know facias be bring to assign  error how far no plea can be plead to it in writ of error bring upon a  judgement recover by a bankrupt the administrator to the bankrupt sue out a to  know facias against the plaintiff in error to make he assign his error to this  to know facias the plaintiff in error plead that the commissioner of the  bankrupt ought to have sue out this writ and not his administrator Mr Robinson  move now that this plea may be set aside which the court accord do for they  say they never allow of any matter to be plead to a to know facias to assign  error
Barnardiston king b neeve and DEBART how far the court can stay execution on  the defendant pay what be good fide due after judgement upon a promissory note  Mr agar move that it may be refer to the master to see what be due and that  upon the defendant pay that execution may be stay but as this be after  judgement the court be of opinion they can not do it Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b Nichols and SWORDPAINTER how far a averment be Allowable  in order to ascertain the time when a bill of Middlesex be sue out when the  statute of limitation be plead what shall be a good rejoinder in such action  in a assumpsit bring by the endorsee of a promissory note the defendant plead  the statute of limitation the plaintiff reply a bill of Middlesex sue out Trin  Geo and that he do sue it within the six year the defendant in his rejoinder  pray oyer of the bill of Middlesex of the endorsement of it and of the return  to it upon which oyer it appear that the writ be stamp the first day of  October and thereupon he set forth the statute make the that and that of W by  which it be provide that no officer shall make out any process till it be  stamp and thereupon aver that this bill of Middlesex be not sue out within the  six year and so conclude to the country upon this the plaintiff demurrer and  show for cause that the matter of the rejoinder be all nugatory and the  conclusion of it wrong Mr agar argue to support it and say that a bill of  Middlesex have no testae to it at commonlaw therefore it can not be know upon  the face of it when it be sue out but he apprehend that the statute of W have  appoint a method by which it may be know upon the face of it when the writ be  sue out videlicet by provide that no writ shall be make out till it be stamp  but the court be of another opinion and say that though a writ be not stamp  Barnardiston king b er p till after it be make out yet the writ do not thereby  become void however the chief justice say that he do not know but all that  part of the rejoinder may be reject and so the conclusion be make good upon  which this matter stand over vide post
Barnardiston king b odel and king how far a lessee for year can maintain  trespass for cut down of tree same assize in trespass bring by the plaintiff  for cut down his tree the plaintiff be nonsuit because it appear that he be  only lessee though the judge say it be hold in the duke of Somerset case that  trespass will lie in such case by copyholder against his lord salk
Barnardiston king b osborn and oil construction on the statute of Geo which  require that law proceed shall be in English in a writ of error upon a  judgement in the common plea the declaration be of Michaelmas last and the  damage lie in it judgement by default and on the writ of inquiry but S damage  give yet the proceed be in English Mr submit it that they ought to have be in  Latin accord to the resolution which the common plea have be of in like case  for which reason the court order this matter to stand over till the court be  full vide postea
Barnardiston king b Philipps and davis when a computation of day be make how  far the last day shall not be consider as one by reason that it be no hallday  term begin the saint of this month and yet the defendant put in a plea of  abatement the that whereas by the rule of the court it ought to have be put in  within four day upon this motion be make to set it aside but the court say the  that day be midsummerday and as it be no hallday of consequence it can not be  put in then therefore the court think it regular Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b pile and grant vide Mr reeves move now that there may be a  trial at bar in this case next term Mr fortescue oppose it upon a affidavit  that the appellant circumstance be so very small that he can not bear the  charge of it he say too next term be a issuable one and therefore by the rule  of the court the trial can not come on then but the court say the general rule  of the court be that appeal shall be try at the bar they do allow they may be  try at nisi prius but in experience they never know one try there they say  suit of this nature be style in the lawbook suit of revenge and not of  satisfaction and therefore the circumstance of the appellant be out of the  question in Bowens case and Slawterfords case the circumstance of the  appellant be in all visible appearance exceed low but yet the court there will  not allow this argument of any weight and both be try at the bar the second  inducement the court think likewise as immaterial as the first for in a case  of this nature they shall certain allow the trial to be next term accord the  trial be appoint for that time the court then begin to consider of a day  convenient for it the venire they say must be test the first day of this term  when the writ of appeal be returnable and not the day the party Barnardiston  king b er p appear on the trial judge Reynolds say may be as soon as the  distringa be award and before the return of it but as the end of the term be  so near the soon the trial can he be the next term and the distringa may be  returnable the first day of it but the court say that will be a inconvenient  day for the trial however they may adjourn the jury from that day to any other  before the next return accord Tuesday in next term be agree to be the day and  in these trial at bar the court say the rule be always draw up with a clause  that the jury shall be strike by the master without any special direction
Barnardiston king b pile and grant vide this be the day appoint for the trial  at the bar and accord sergeant chapel move for the defendant that the  appellant may be call he say that he have affidavit to produce that the  appellant have not all this while so much as demand the freeholder book of the  undersheriff or his agent above and yet a trial at bar be express appoint for  today Mr fortescue on the other side say that they have a affidavit to produce  that they have demand they of the late high sheriff but that he refuse to give  they because he be just go out of his office that they have demand they  likewise of the present high sheriff but that he refuse to deliver they  because he be not swear into his office therefore he pray that there may be a  far day give to the party to appear the court say that the appellant be by law  demandable on every day that be give he to appear by writ or by the roll but  that they can not record the nonsuit because the venire be not produce nor the  roll in court they say there may be reason to think that the entry be not  proper make up upon the roll no more than a proper care take to prepare for  trial and therefore they make a rule that no entry of this sort shall be  supply they say likewise that at present there be sufficient reason to bail  the defendant for the affect delay and accord take his own recognizance in on  the civil side to the appellant himself to appear on the last day of the term
Barnardiston king b rag and king how far the admiraltycourt have no  jurisdiction in case of wage belong to the master of a ship a rule have be  make to show cause why a prohibition shall not go to the admiraltycourt in a  suit there for wage bring by a master and boatswain of a ship dr henchman and  Mr birch come to discharge it the court say that this matter have be full  settle in the case of king and player that the admiraltycourt have no  jurisdiction in decree wage for a master of a ship where the contract be upon  land and therefore make the rule absolute as to the master and discharge it as  to the boatswain
Barnardiston king b Rawlinson and smith how far the court will discharge a  rule whereby liberty be give to withdraw a plea the common sergeant move to  discharge a rule by which the defendant have liberty to withdraw his plea and  plead nul tiel record upon payment of cost and this motion he make upon a  affidavit that the master have settle the cost and the plaintiff demand they  of he last night but that the defendant have not pay they accord it be grant
Barnardiston king b redhead and CATHGUT how far the court will set aside a  plea by reason of its be frivolous in debt on a charterparty the plaintiff  declare on a deed make in the joint name of Blackwood and Cathgut but execute  by the defendant only to this declaration the defendant plead that the say  charterparty be not the deed of the say Blackwood and the defendant upon which  Mr Filmer move that this plea may be set aside as frivolous Mr draper on the  other side say that this be intend to be a plea of the general issue and  therefore if there be any mistake in it the court will not set it aside but he  apprehend the plea be a good one and for this purpose cite Matthew case Rep  and lev where it be hold that if two person execute a deed and the seal of one  of they be tear off the deed be make void as to both the court think the case  cite plain differ from the present one and that the plea in question can in no  manner be maintain accord set it aside
Barnardiston king b Robinson and noble vide ante Mr reeves and Mr strange now  come to show cause they say that the bylaw as set forth upon the return to the  habeas corpus be too general it be that no freeman of the city shall employ  another as journeyman unless such journeyman be free of the city too and this  without any exception whether there be sufficient journeyman freeman within  the city or not and they say in truth the fact be so that there be several  hundred journeyman employ in this trade of a shoemaker more than there be  freeman to work in it Mr strange then take another objection that the custom  set forth upon the return be that no person occupy any trade or mystery who be  free of the city shall employ any foreigner but the bylaw set forth be that no  freeman in general shall employ such person they say the bylaw here be more  extensive than the custom whereas the bylaw can be support without the custom  the court agree that there be not a sufficient number of journeymenfreemen  within the city may be a sufficient justification for the defendant to plead  to the action bring against he upon the bylaw and judge page say he believe he  may take advantage of this matter in evidence upon the general issue of nil  debet but they think this be no objection to the bylaw itself and in the case  of the freeporters of the city of London they say nothing of this be set out  upon the return of there be a sufficient number of freepotters but however the  second objection they think have a good deal of weight in it so this matter be  order to stand over vide post
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant for what offence the court will grant a  information against a justice of peace this be a information that be move for  against a justice of peace who be likewise a attorney and the case be that a  bailiff have take a distress and continue with it on the possession upon that  the justice send a warrant for he and ask he why he continue with the distress  on the possession tell he he have sue out a replevin the bailiff tell he the  distress be deliver to he to keep and he will take care of it upon which the  justice send he to the house of correction to continue there till he shall be  discharge by due course of law and for this the court grant the information  for they say they will never suffer a man to enforce his authority as a  attorney with that of a justice of peace
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a certiorari will lie to remove a  poor rate Mr Wirley have obtain a mandamus sometime ago for the make a new  rate for the relief of the poor in the parish of utoxeter and have likewise  obtain a certiorari for the bring up all order relate to this parish but the  justice have not send up this rate with it for which reason he move now for a  certiorari to bring up this rate the court say this be not a motion of course  for a certiorari to remove a rate however make a rule to show cause vide post
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a habeas corpus ad to make a  witness can be grant without affidavit sergeant shepherd move for a habeas  corpus to be direct to the warden of the fleet to carry the body of six of his  prisoner to give their evidence against hug before the grand inquest at London  but as there be no affidavit produce of their be material witness the court  say they can not do it for it be a rule that they never grant habeas corpus ad  to make a witness but upon affidavit
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a indictment for a forcible entry  shall not be good by reason of its not set forth the interest which the party  have in the land on motion to quash a indictment for a forcible entry and  detainer the exception to it be that it be only say in the indictment of which  house he be possessionatus and it be not say what estate he have in it and if  he be only tenant at will or sufferance the statute do not extend to he upon  this exception the indictment be quash
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a information can be move for  against a mayor unless notice be give of the motion on motion for a  information against the mayor of esham for not hold a courtleet and session of  gaoldelivery in pursuance of the charter judge probin say that the mayor be a  justice of peace by the charter and therefore notice ought to be give of the  motion Mr Lacey agree it if the information have be move for against he for  any omission of his duty as justice of peace but as it be for a omission of  his duty in his public capacity as mayor he submit it to be otherwise however  the rest of the court concur with judge probin accord the motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a information shall be grant for  bribery Mr Starkey move for a information against one Stephens a member of the  corporation of NewRadnor for receive a bribe of one price to give his vote  upon a election for a officer of that corporation as price shall direct he and  for give his vote accord he say the court grant the like motion in the case of  one Hutchinson of Carlisle and accord a rule be make to show cause
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a mandamus will lie to justice of  peace to compel they to swear in a constable who be choose at the leet a  mandamus be move for to be direct to sir William Dudley a justice of peace to  swear in two person constable who be choose at the leet but be not present in  order to be swear there it say the session can not appoint the constable in  this case because the leet have and the constable can be swear no where in  this case but by particular justice to which purpose be cite salk accord the  mandamus be grant
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a mandamus will not lie in order to  require person to bold a court of conservancy relate to the river Thames Mr  Pilsworth move for a mandamus to be direct to the justice of peace in  Berkshire require they to hold a court of conservancy in pursuance of Richard  for that part of the river of Thames which lie in their county but the chief  justice say that if there be any complaint concern these river they be to be  make at the ordinary court of session by the word of this statute and no  particular court of conservancy be appoint by the Act for this purpose judge  lee say that the court in London be erect by charter give to the city accord  the motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a prohibition lie to stay proceed  in the ecclesiastical court in a suit for the payment of a rate prohibition be  move for to be direct to the consistory court of York to stay there proceed in  a suit for the payment of a rate upon a suggestion that the party land do not  lie in that parish where the rate be make of which matter they have plead  below but still the court there go on proceed and so will try the bind of  parish the court say that the party ought not only to have plead that the land  do not lie within that parish but that they lie within some other for non  constat upon this plea that the party have any land and if this will be matter  proper for appeal however as the counsel say the fact be that the land lie in  the next adjoin parish the court make a rule to show cause vide post
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far a writ of inquiry shall be say to  be undue execute in respect of the time of the execution of it on motion by Mr  Theede to set aside a writ of inquiry for its be execute at half a hour after  whereas the notice be for execute it between and the court be of opinion that  the party ought to have stay a hour after the time mention for execute it  accord refuse the motion chief justice absent
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far bail above shall be say to be  regular Mr agar move to stay proceed against bail in Hilary vacation the  plaintiff sue out the writ which be returnable the first Wednesday in easter  term and on the Monday follow take a assignment of the bailbond on which same  day bail be put in Mr strange submit it that the four day for put in bail must  be reckon inclusive so that the last day for put in bail be on the Saturday  but the court be of opinion that one of the day must be exclusive and that  therefore the bail above be regular accord grant the motion
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far double cost ought to be grant upon  the statute of James the plaintiff have discontinue his action which he bring  against a officer who justify as such in the execution of his office Mr draper  move for double cost upon the statute of James accord a rule be make to show  cause
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far exception for supersede a writ must  be take before the return of it Mr Abney move that a writ of mandamus may be  supersede which be direct to Mr pilkinton and another overseer of the parish  of saint George require they to deliver over to Mr Bletsow and another all  public book paper and write relate to the poor of that parish which be in  their custody in the case of utoxeter he say it be late determine that a  certiorari will not lie to remove poor rate and by the same reason he submit  it the present mandamus will not he observe far that there be a contest now  depend between these very person concern the right of election and as Mr  pilkinton and the other person have get the possession of the book the court  will certain not take it from they judge probin say that the reason why the  court do not grant certiorar to remove poor rate be because there be a appeal  give to another jurisdiction and therefore till a order of justice be make  upon they the court have nothing to do with they but in the present case when  the office of overseer determine which be within a limit time it be certain  that the book ought to be deliver to his successor and therefore undoubted the  court will grant a mandamus for that purpose which the rest of the court agree  to as to the fact concern the contest about the election they say that will  proper come upon the return and judge lee say another reason why the court  will not supersede Barnardiston king b er p this writ of mandamus be because  the return be out and he say it be determine in the time of Lord Raymond that  a exception for supersede a writ must be take before the day of the return of  it
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far in trover the defendant can plead  but two sort of plead in bar namely not guilty and a release in trover the  defendant have plead that he make no conversion of the good of the plaintiff  and this cause have come on to be try before the chief justice he be of  opinion that the defendant have admit a property in the plaintiff and  thereupon there be no defence upon which Mr strange now move for a new trial  and that the defendant may have liberty to plead de to make new by reason that  this be a mere mistake in the plead the chief justice say it have be often  hold that there be but two plead in trover not guilty and a release and  therefore the present manner of plead be owe to a mistake accord a rule be  make to show cause why a new trial shall not be grant but the court say the  other part of the motion with regard to plead de to make new must be make  afterward
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far it be necessary or not that a  person shall be summon before a order of basterday can be make upon he Mr  Hayward move for a information against a justice of peace for make a order of  bastardy upon one Fitzgerald without give he a summons to attend judge lee say  he think it have be determine upon debate that a summons in these case be not  necessary because if the party be summon it be likely that he will run away Mr  strange say he believe he remember the case judge lee refer to but upon his  memory all that be determine in that case be that it need not appear upon the  face of the order of bastardy that the party be summon and Mr Hayward say the  justice may issue his warrant to bring the party before he in the first  instance and by that all the danger of his run away will be prevent however  upon the court be conceive a doubt whether that case be not determine as judge  lee mention they make no rule at present but give Mr Hayward liberty to move  this matter again vide postea
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far it be requisite or not that there  shall be fourteen day for notice of trial motion be make to set aside a trial  have at Huntington assize for that the defendant live above forty mile from  the place where the trial be and yet that there be not fourteen day notice  give the chief justice say that such notice of trial be only requisite to be  give where the cause be try in London or Middlesex and the defendant life at  forty mile distance from that place accord the motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far notice be necessary to be give to  the attorney general Mr Kettleby move for a habeas corpus to be direct to the  warden of the fleet to bring up the body of a prisoner who be in execution at  the king suit in order that he may be charge with a indictment of battery the  court say they never grant these motion without notice give to the attorney  general even in the case where bail will surrender a prisoner they observe  that there be a ordinary remedy which the party have videlicet to outlaw the  prisoner and therefore they refuse to grant the present motion till notice
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far several offence must be join in one  information Mr Hopkins move for several information against different people  for a grievous battery but the court say in these case all the offender be  join in one information Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will allow a defendant to  plead four plead chess the defendant be sue as administrator durante those  inferior in rank lifetime and on rule to show cause the court allow he to  plead four plead to the same matter non assumpsit non assumpsit infra sex aged  plene to manage quod infant ultra aged seven decim born to be
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will grant a attachment  against a person for not make a return to a habeas corpus without first of all  make a rule to return the writ Mr Kettleby move for a attachment against one  wright the keeper of a madhouse for not make a return to a habeas corpus but  Mr masterman inform the court that he take the practice to be to obtain a rule  for his return the writ upon which Mr Kettleby say that he believe in the case  of colonel Dunbar a attachment be grant direct for his not make a return to a  habeas corpus where he be go to ship off some people direct without authority  judge page say too in the case of dr fellow he believe the same be do where a  habeas corpus be direct to he to bring up a person who be order by he to be  put under a pump of cold water to cure he of a pretend madness and judge lee  take it the case of Mr Baldwin of Ludlow be in point the chief justice say  likewise that he believe the distinction be between these habeas corpus direct  to private person and those to public officer accord the court be grant the  attachment and then the return be put in
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will grant a information  against a person for adjourn a assembly illegal Mr strange now move for a  information against Mr Brereton for adjourn the assembly in the manner that be  mention in the forgo case and say this be plain a offence within the that of  Geo accord the court make a rule to show cause in this case likewise vide the  former case
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will grant a mandamus to  appoint officer in extraparochial place upon sergeant chapel motion the court  grant a mandamus to certain justice of peace to appoint churchwarden and  overseer of the poor in a extraparochial place upon a affidavit that there be  much occasion for these officer to make rate to relieve the poor
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will not grant a  attachment for disobey a judge order motion be make for a attachment against a  attorney for not obey a order of Mr justice page but the chief justice say  that the method of proceed against person that disobey order make at the judge  chamber be settle about two year ago and the judge agree it shall be by move  the court that the party may show cause why the order shall not be perform  which be do accord in this case
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will not proceed in a  summary method relate to atorneys scacc Mr Fenwick move that a promissory note  of but not for value receive give to a attorney of this court for law charge  may be refer to the deputy to see what be due upon it and that upon payment of  what be due proceed at law in this court may be stay he say there be a direct  imposition in obtain the note and in fact there be but due to the attorney  when the defendant give it the chief baron say that if it have appear upon the  face of the note that it be give for law charge they may have do it but here  they can not and the only remedy be to take advantage of this imposition upon  the trial or to prefer a bill bat Mr baron carter seem at first to think that  it may upon motion and to this purpose he mention Rhodes case in chancery  where even a bind and judgement be give and the court look into the whole upon  affidavit and this even upon a motion but the chief baron say that that case  be between attorney and client and there it may certain be do but here it be  between a attorney and a three person and accord the court reject the motion  baron carter agree that that may make the difference
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will not quash a  excommunicate to take in hand notwithstanding some uncertainty in describe the  offence Mr Kettleby move to quash a writ of excommunicate to take in hand for  uncertainty the sentence against the defendant be set out to be in a cause of  slander or defamation he say he remember Mr strange obtain a rule for quash  such writ in causan reprimand sive defamationis the direct translation of the  word a loud noise he take to be slander and therefore submit it that that case  be direct in point with the present one judge lee say he remember when Mr  strange make that motion he cite a book which show that the word a loud noise  in the civil law sense of it signify a different matter from the word  defamatio therefore in that case there be a plain uncertainty but in the  present one the court say that their opinion be that a charge of slander and a  charge of defamation signify exact the same thing for which reason the present  motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will set aside a plea in  bar by reason of its be frivolous in debt on judgement the defendant plead nil  debet and motion be make to set this plea aside as be a frivolous one judge  page say this be a plea in bar however make a rule to show cause vide post
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the court will set aside a plea of  misnomer by reason of its be frivolous a plea in abatement be put in that the  defendant name be Martin without hoc that it be marten on motion to set this  plea aside the court say that this be so clear a sham plea by reason that the  name be exact of the same sound accord they make a rule to show cause and  order the attorney to attend chief justice absent
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant how far the ecclesiastical court have a  right to hold plea in matter of slander a prohibition be pray to be direct to  the consistory court of Ely for hold plea in these word you be a jilt and  strumpet but the court say it have be determine that they may hold plea for  word of call a man a cuckold for give a man that name be by implication call  his wife a whore and in the present case they say the word strumpet signify a  whore and more so refuse the motion lev cro salk
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant the course of proceed in action bring  against a attorney motion be make that a eight day rule may be enlarge for  execute a writ of inquiry in town upon account of the defendant live above  mile off in the country but the court refuse the motion because the defendant  appear to be a attorney of the court and by that be suppose to be always  attend here
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant the time which a person be allow to put in  his traverse to a return to a mandamus a return to a mandamus have come in  last term to swear in a officer of the corporation of Limington Mr strange  move that the other side may be oblige Barnardiston king b er p to put in  their traverse to this return before the last day of the term in order that he  may have a opportunity to move for a trial at bar he say upon these return the  party have it in his power to traverse every distinct fact of it and he be  inform the other side intend to do so in the present case for which reason  there will be a direct necessity for try this cause at the bar but in order to  prevent their do this the other side have resolve not to put in their traverse  to it till the last instant of the term he say if his motion can not be grant  in this way he will desire to turn it another and that be to move for a trial  at bar now though the issue be not join he observe that in ejectment such  motion be frequent yet there the tenant may plead ancient demesne or demurrer  but the court say that they can not restrain the time which the law give the  defendant to put his traverse in and as to the case of the ejectment that be  peculiar to itself accord both part of the motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant what relate to change of venue the  defendant have obtain a rule for change the venue and now after issue join Mr  gapper move that the plaintiff may have his venue change back again upon enter  into the common rule to give material evidence in the county where he have  first lie it but the court say that the rule upon the plaintiff and defendant  in these case be mutual that a venue can be change one way or the other after  delivery or acceptance of a plea and the plaintiff they say be under no  difficulty by this mean because the defendant be oblige to serve the plaintiff  with the rule for change the venue before he deliver his plea and that be  sufficient notice to the plaintiff to move to have it change back again before  he accept the plea Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant what shall be a good affidavit for put off  a trial a motion be make to put off a trial upon a affidavit that one of the  defendant witness be go to NewYork and the other be late become a bankrupt and  abscond but the counsel of the other side object that the defendant ought to  have swear when he believe his first witness will be back and when he believe  his second witness will appear for at this rate he say a trial may be put off  for ever but the chief justice say as this be the first time that the  defendant have move to put it off he do not see but such a affidavit will do  and judge Reynolds say in some case it be impossible to swear when he believe  his witness will be back as be in a case the other day when a trial be put off  upon account of one of the defendant witness be go with sir Charles wager  fleet in which case he say it be impossible to swear when a man believe he  will be back unless you can know what the order from the government be but  however for some other defect in the affidavit the court do not grant the  motion in this case
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant what shall not be say to be a sufficient  consent that a submission to arbitration be make a rule of court on motion by  Mr Floyd that a submission to a arbitration may be make a rule of court it  appear that the consent be only that the award shall be make a rule of court  Mr Monday say that the court have often refuse make submission to arbitration  rule of court upon such consent accord this be refuse in the present case
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant when a action be bring by a assignee of a  bailbond upon what term the court will stay proceed in such action sergeant  shepherd move to stay proceed upon a assignment of a bailbond upon enter into  a rule to plead the general issue take notice of trial within term and give  judgement upon the bailbond to stand for a security and as this case be he say  the plaintiff will have no delay the court say this proposal must Barnardiston  king b er p be understand of give three judgement upon the bailbond as there  be three person joint and several bind in it for there be no other way in  which the intent of the party can be equal satisfy because if a action in  Triple the sum shall be bring against all three and a judgement have that  judgement will survive from one to the other and the lie will not be  reciprocal upon each of they and their executor but the sergeant say that the  cost of three judgement will be too much and therefore they choose rather that  the plaintiff shall go on
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant when a peremptory rule be make upon a  sheriff to return a writ how far it shall be with cost Mr brook move for a  peremptory rule upon a sheriff to return a writ the court say that there  appear so manifest a oppression in sheriff by their not execute the process  duly as it ought to be that they have resolve to grant these peremptory rule  with cost accord they do so in the present case Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant when a person act as undersheriff and  attorney both contrary to the statute of h how far the court will grant a  information against he Mr wheat move for a information against one burst for  act as undersheriff of huntingdonshire and as a attorney at one and the same  time he say this be against the statute of h accord the court make a rule to  show cause vide postea
Barnardiston king b Scythian plant when a person practice as a attorney in a  inferior court without be qualify accord to Geo how far the superior court  will not grant a attachment against he a motion be make for a attachment  against a man for practice as a attorney in the county court not be regular  admit accord to the statute of Geo the court say if this man have practice in  their court it will have be a contempt in he and they shall have grant a  attachment but as he have practice in another court it be only a contempt in  he to that court for which reason they refuse the motion and leave he to be  prosecute for the penalty as the Act direct term mich geo
Barnardiston king b shakespeare on the demise OF mill against day and other  how far the court will not put off the trial in ejectment notwithstanding the  party want the inspection of deed which be in the custody of another in  ejectment the defendant move that the trial may be put off till the sit after  term upon affidavit that the plaintiff attorney be in possession of certain  deed material for the defendant to produce in evidence and have refuse to  deliver they the chief justice say that though the lessor of the plaintiff  himself have be in possession of those deed that will have be no reason for  put off the trial in ejectment accord the motion be refuse Donalt v Lowther  Barnardiston king er report date DONALT and Lowther how far the tithe of a  cornmill shall be say to be praedial tithe or not the defendant have libel in  the spiritual court for the tithe of a cornmill as praedial tithe the  plaintiff set forth in his answer that he conceive the tithe of a cornmill to  be a personal tithe and therefore pray to be allow all his necessary charge in  attend the mill before the tithe shall be pay the judge overrule this plea and  decree that the plaintiff shall pay these tithe without any such deduction  upon which Mr Dennison move for a prohibition and cite the case of chamberlain  and Clifton determine in the house of lord the that of June wherein it be  resolve that the tithe of a cornmill be personal tithe accord a rule be make  to show cause
Barnardiston king b shergold and BOSTRICK vide ante the common sergeant come  now and inform the court that the return be amend accord to the last exception  and therefore pray a procedendo but judge page say that he think that yet it  be not make right for he observe that it be true indeed that the return have  set out the custom to be that where a debt be contract in London a action of  debt will lie for it against the executor in the city court but then it say  that accord the defendant be arrest upon a process in a action for debt pron   interrog  tenor sequitur in haec word and then set forth that the plaintiff  testator be indebt to the defendant in the parish of saint Helen in London and  so be indebt to go away to loosen now he take notice that it do not at all  appear by this that the debt in the present case be contract in London and  therefore the court below have not give itself a jurisdiction but the common  sergeant say that the constant practice in the city court have always be to  declare in this short way and in this it differ from all other inferior  jurisdiction so that if the cause of action shall happen not to have arise  within their jurisdiction the party ought to plead it the court accord all  agree at last that the return be sufficient and upon that grant a procedendo
Barnardiston king b sir joseph jekyll against crump how far a court of equity  will set aside a plea by reason of its not be verify by affidavit canc a to  know facias have be take out of the PettyBag against tertenants the defendant  plead that he be lessee for year only and not tenant of the freehold Mr  fazakerly move that this plea may be set aside as be in abatement and not  verify by affidavit Mr agar on the other side urge that such to know facias  can only be bring against tenant of the freehold and therefore the plea be to  the substance of the writ but Lord chancellor set the plea aside and give the  defendant three day to plead in bar or demurrer
Barnardiston king b smith and Horner vide ante on rule to show cause why a  execution shall not be set aside for its have be execute after allowance of a  writ of error Mr reeves say that the present writ of error be void and  consequent can be no supersedeas the fact he say be that there have be former  a writ of error upon this judgement in the common plea but quash upon the  plaintiff in error own motion now he have think proper to bring another writ  of error upon the same judgement as of a judgement likewise in that court  whereas Mr reeves insist it ought to have be a writ of error quod in person  thou the court say the single question here be whether the record below be  transcribe or not before the quash of the first writ of error for if it be  undoubted the writ of error ought to have be quod in person thou as be settle  in the case of Cowper and ginger in this court find upon the case of Walter  and Stokoe upon that the court think proper to refer this fact to be inquire  of by the master
Barnardiston king b smith and laughton vide ante this case come on again Mr  strange say the point in question have already receive a solemn resolution in  the case of the king and the bishop of meath pasch Geo that be a quare hinder  by original in Ireland on writ of error it appear by the record that the  venire be award returnable at a day certain upon this two question be make one  whether this be a miscontinuance aid by the statute of Jeofails the other  whether the statute of Jeofails extend to the civil suit of the crown after a  good deal of deliberation Lord chief justice Parker deliver the resolution of  the court with regard to the first point they hold it to be a miscontinuance  and therefore aid by the statute of Jeofails to which purpose   light be cite  where a miscontinuance be describe to be the give a improper day to the party  with regard to the second point they be of opinion likewise that the statute  of Jeofails do extend to the civil suit of the crown Mr Parker say too that he  be of counsel with the plaintiff in error in the case of lipper and Hobbs and  upon look into the case of the king and the bishop of meath he advice the  party to waive the exception and pay the money recover which he do accord in  the present case the court affirm the judgement ex relatum
Barnardiston king b spencer and the MANUCAPTORS OF Donelly how far the court  will give leave that a vacatur shall be enter upon a record on motion for the  master report the fact come out to be in this manner in the bailpiece the  defendant have acknowledge themselves to be bail for John Donelly gentle but  in the recognizance they be enter to be bail for John Donelly Esq a to know  facias have be bring upon this recognizance to which the defendant plead nul  tiel record the record come before the master to be verify this recognizance  be produce and he enter a to carry out record motion have be make that the  entry of this to carry out may be vacate and that the recognizance may be make  agreeable to the bailpiece the court think this to be reasonable accord the  rule be make so
Barnardiston king b spink and hare when a action be bring upon a attorney bill  what evidence must be give in order to support such action lend assize in a  action bring by a administrator to recover a attorney bill it be object at  bury assize that evidence ought to be give of the bill be tender to the  defendant before the commence of the action but judge page hold it not  material accord no evidence of that sort be produce
Barnardiston king b SPINMORE and bowler on rule to show cause why the  defendant shall not be discharge out of custody upon his have sign a nonpros  for want of the plaintiff declare against he within two term Mr strange say  that the fact be that the defendant be sue in one of the CityCourts and remove  he self here by habeas corpus after that he make a escape and be take up by a  escapewarrant be commit to Newgate upon this he lie in Newgate for above two  term and the plaintiff do not declare against he upon the state of this case  Mr strange say he shall submit it that the nonpros be irregular sign he do  agree that if the action have not be bring in the citycourt but have be bring  here the nonpros will have be regular and accord to the intent of the statute  of W m and a but he submit it that the statute of a have only provide that  proceed shall go on against the party take upon a escape warrant where a  action be actual pen against he at the time of the escape and in the present  case no action be depend for the action in the citycourt be determine by the  habeas corpus and no action be begin in this court the court think this a  matter deserve consideration so the whole of it be refer to the master that  the irregularity of the nonpros may be inquire into vide post
Barnardiston king b SWEETAPPLE and goodfellow how far a person can take out a  capias against the principal pen a writ of error in order to charge the bail  on rule to show cause why proceed against bail shall not be stay for the  capias be take out against the principal and non be invention return after  writ Barnardiston king b er p of error bring Mr Kettleby say that he submit a  capias may be take out for this particular purpose because the bail can be  charge without it and he observe that the proceed against the bail be a suit  entire different from the proceed against the principal he say it be constant  practice to proceed in such collateral action notwithstanding a injunction to  stay proceed in the original one and he think a writ of error do not differ in  this respect the chief justice own that he think there be a case about Ann in  this court the name of it be Perkins and Woolaston where a motion of this sort  be make and yet such proceed hold to be regular however because he can not  think such opinion can be maintain for law he agree with the rest of the court  that the rule shall be make absolute which accord be so do
Barnardiston king b tailor and how far the court will not allow a amendment of  a declaration unless the other side consent to it in a action of debt bring by  a assignee of the reversion the plaintiff have omit to set forth in his  declaration that the assignment be make de to send forward and have only  declare of a assignment general to this there have be a demurrer and a  concilium make up sergeant girdler now come and move to have liberty to amend  the declaration in this respect and the other side consent to it but the court  order the rule express to be draw up by consent and not otherwise for they  think it a amendment in substance
Barnardiston king b term trin geo two Metcalf and hay how far the court will  make a rule for refer a scrivener bill to be tax in a action bring by the  plaintiff for a sum of money due to he as scrivener Mr field obtain a rule the  last day of the last term for tax his bill Mr Abney and Mr strange move now  that that rule may be discharge and for this purpose produce a affidavit that  all the item of the bill relate to business do by the plaintiff as scrivener  and not as attorney for which reason they submit it that this case be not  within the statute of g Mr marsh and Mr field argue on the other side and say  that the plaintiff be admit a attorney immediate upon the make of that Act as  they believe all other scrivener be think that they be include within it they  observe far that many of the item relate to that which be the proper business  of atorneys particular that for draw precipe and concord of a fine and  therefore though the plaintiff have swear that he do not act in these matter  as attorney yet they submit it this case must be within the meaning of the Act  and last they take notice that when the former rule be obtain Mr strange have  notice give he of the motion and he defend it then for which reason it be too  late now to move to discharge it the chief justice say that in the nature of  the thing itself he shall have think this matter proper for the examination of  the master as many of the item relate mere to the business of a attorney but  for the last reason that have be mention namely that the court make this rule  on hear counsel on both side he think clear that it ought to stand accord the  present motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b the archbishop OF Armagh and dr Whaley against the king  vide ante this matter come now before the house of lord upon a writ of error  all the judge that be at that time present be ten in number together with the  LawLords eleven bishop be of opinion the judgement shall be affirm but the  rest of the lord be seven in majority reverse the judgement the single point  go upon be that the death of dr drelincourt be admit and institute into this  rectory bar the king turn and this they think they be not conclude from  determine notwithstanding the plead
Barnardiston king b the archbishop OF Canterbury and the master fellow and  scholar OF trinitycollege in cambridge the time which the court give to show  cause against a mandamus Mr lee move for time till the next term to show cause  upon a rule that have be make for a mandamus to be direct to trinitycollege to  admit a librarian upon the appointment of the archbishop he have this power  give he by the statute of the college he say there will be a good deal of time  necessary to be take up in look into several of these statute to see whether  the bishop have such a power or not and the college be not serve with this  rule till Friday last the court say if this have be a motion for time to make  a return to a mandamus the suggestion of difficulty may have be very proper  but five day time be enough to show cause why the mandamus shall not go they  say too there can be no prejudice to you by the go of the mandamus for if the  archbishop have not this right you will not be in contempt by refuse to obey  it but there may be a prejudice to the other side for if the archbishop have  this right the librarian ought to be admit immediate and receive the profit of  his office which if he be not admit to now he will have no remedy for
Barnardiston king b the king against duffin and other how far the presence of  a mayor be necessary to be at a corporate assembly Mr Abney move that a rule  to show cause may be make absolute for grant a information in the nature of a  quo warranto against the defendant duffin for act as mayor of the borough of  Oxford and likewise against several other defendant for act as capital burgess  of the borough the validity of who election depend on the election of duffin  the constitution of this borough consist of a mayor eight portmen and capital  burgess the capital burgess have a power of nominate two of these portmen to  the inhabitant and the inhabitant appoint one of they to be mayor for the year  ensue the charterday be the Monday before the Feast of saint Michael and when  duffin be choose to be mayor on the charterday no mayor be present at the  assembly by reason that Scolden the former mayor have at that time judgement  in quo warranto give against he upon this state of the case Mr Abney submit it  that the election of duffin be illegal and the court incline to be of the same  opinion the chief justice say he do agree that wherever any business be to be  do by a particular part of a corporation only the presence of the mayor be not  requisite at the assembly but wherever the business be to be do by the whole  corporation at large the presence of the mayor be absolute necessary in the  present case he think all the member of the corporation have a voice in the  election accord the rule be make absolute
Barnardiston king b the king against nap and other how far a affidavit be  necessary to be take notice of in draw up a rule of court sergeant chapel move  that a rule may be make absolute for a information in the nature of a quo  warranto go against the defendant to show by what authority they claim to be  freeman of the city of Winchester Mr strange on the other side say that as to  two of the defendant he shall not oppose the rule be make absolute but as to  the other the cause that he show be that the election of these defendant to  their freedom depend upon the validity of the election of the late mayor that  a rule indeed be make absolute for a information in the nature of a quo  warranto against the mayor and that rule be read when this rule for show cause  be obtain but it do not appear by this rule that any of those affidavit which  the former rule be obtain upon be read at that time Mr tailor who be attorney  for the prosecutor however do aver that he have those affidavit in court and  they be both put in at that time it be not think necessary that the affidavit  shall be read the court say that it be certain that those affidavit can not  conclude the present defendant but they ought to have a opportunity of answer  they for which reason they think that those affidavit shall have be insert in  the rule and because they be not the court discharge it
Barnardiston king b the king and abel what shall not be a good conviction upon  the turnpike Act this be a conviction against the defendant upon a statute  make Geo for not account as collector of a turnpike and the exception take to  it by Mr fazakerly be that it do not appear by the evidence as set forth in  the conviction that the witness swear the defendant to be collector he do  agree that this be charge in the information and that in the conclusion it be  say super quo and the information be read to the defendant and he hear what be  say nil to say which may seem to supply the defect of the evidence be not set  forth more full but he insist it can not for that no intendment shall be allow  in a matter of this nature the chief justice say if it have be aver that the  defendant confess the fact as set forth in the information that will have  supply the defect in set out the evidence because when the party have confess  the fact all other evidence be unnecessary but a nil to say be only a not  contradict which be not sufficient of itself and therefore the set forth that  there be evidence give be necessary accord the court make a rule for quash the  conviction nisi causan within a week Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b the king and bell at what time the court grant their rule  for inspect book of a corporation Mr fortescue and Mr Kettleby move to  discharge a rule for the inspection of public book in the corporation of  Marlborough they say there have only be a rule make for show cause why a  information shall not be grant against the defendant for exercise the office  of burgess in this borough so that at present there be no cause in court for  the enter into a recognizance on the part of the prosecutor make it such a one  and that be never do till the rule make absolute they say far though the  information shall be grant and even there if it appear by the recognizance  that a common informer only prosecute the court will never suffer this motion  Mr Kettleby say far that he do admit that in some case the court have go so  far as to grant rule for these inspection before make the rule absolute for  the information but he remember particular in the dispute between alderman  Brocas and alderman Baylis this motion be express refuse he then observe that  the rule be draw up in such a expensive manner in the present case as he  believe be beyond all kind of precedent for it be to have inspection of all  public book record entry and paper the court say in the case of Bedford level  the distinction be settle between where a common informer appear to be  prosecutor and where the party interest and they remember in the present case  that the rule for show cause upon the information be make at the complaint of  a party interest then as to the form of this rule Mr masterman say that they  have not be of a long date but from the time of their be first grant they have  always be draw up in this manner accord the court refuse the motion  Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b the king and BETSWORTH how far a mandamus will not lie to  the ecclesiastical court in order to require they to grant letter of  administration a mandamus have be grant to the defendant require he to make  out letter of administration Mr tailor move that it may be supersede upon a  affidavit that there be a suit now depend concern the probate of the will he  say he hope the court will not expect a return of this matter and for this  purpose he cite Mod the chief justice say that it appear by the affidavit that  the suit be commence since the grant the mandamus and therefore it can hardly  be a reason for supersede it however a rule be make to show cause a few day  after this matter come on again and then Mr strange consent that the writ  shall be make absolute
Barnardiston king b the king and BLACKGRAVE how far the king bench may  exercise a jurisdiction over the writ of excommunicate to take in hand before  the return of it this be a motion for a attachment against the defendant for a  rescous Mr reeves be counsel against the motion and he say it be true indeed  the defendant be take up upon a excommunicate to take in hand and that he do  rescous himself but he say till the writ be return into this court there be  nothing of the cause in court and therefore the court can grant a attachment  for a contempt do before the return of it and consequent the attachment ought  not to go but judge Reynolds say that the writ be suppose to be enrol in this  court before the return and therefore the court may grant a attachment for a  contempt do before the return and he say he remember a case where it be  determine that a writ of excommunicate to take in hand may be supersede before  the return upon which the court grant the attachment
Barnardiston king b the king and budgel how far a witness shall not be examine  before a judge in criminal case a rule be make upon the prosecutor to show  cause why the trial shall not be put off one of the defendant witness not be  able without danger of her life to Barnardiston king b er p appear at the  trial the prosecutor offer to allow her testimony to be take before a judge  but the court say they never suffer it to be do in criminal case
Barnardiston king b the king and Burford what kind of indictment the court  will quash Mr reeves move on behalf of the prosecutor to quash a indictment of  perjury for there be a mistake in it in lie the fact the chief justice at  first doubt whether it be usual to quash indictment for so great offence but  Mr Abney say he remember the same be do in the case of the king and rouse and  judge lee say that he remember the same in the case of the king and the  inhabitant of Aynesworth that be a indictment for not repair a highway which  the court will not have quash but on the behalf of the prosecutor accord the  court do it in the present case
Barnardiston king b the king and crook vide ante the defendant be now bring up  again the court declare that they be unanimous in opinion that the defendant  crime be within the clause of the statute of Elizabeth that have be mention  for the plain word of this clause be that whoever forge a deed with a intent  of disturb the freehold of another shall suffer the penalty of it though he do  not actual charge or disturb it accord judgement be pronounce for the king
Barnardiston king b the king and de veil how far the court will grant a  information against a justice of peace on rule to show cause why a information  shall not go against the defendant the complaint against he appear to be short  thus five boy have be commit by he for a theft the good steal be carry to a  pawnbrokers upon which Mr de veil send to the pawnbrokers require he to bring  the good to he in order that he may have they forthcoming at the trial the  good accord be bring produce by Mr de veil at the trial and the boy convict  when the conviction be over the party rob apply to Mr de veil for the good but  Mr de veil tell he the keeper of Bridewell who custody the boy be commit to  have be with he and inform he that he have be at a good deal of expense in  keep the boy in prison and attend with they at the trial which come to S per  boy upon which Mr de veil tell the party that he must pay this money to the  keeper and that he shall not deliver the good to he till he have pay it the  money accord be pay but afterward S of it be return upon this state  Barnardiston king b er p of the case the court make the rule absolute and say  that they think the require the good to be bring and the money pay be both  illegal
Barnardiston king b the king and Empson how far the court will quash a order  of session vide post Mr agar move to quash some order of sewer upon a  exception that the fact be only lie by way of recital with a quod cum ad haec  sitting present to be accord a rule be make to show cause chief justice absent
Barnardiston king b the king and franklin vide ante the attorney general pray  now the judgement of the court against the prisoner accord the information be  read which charge he with publish a libel against the present ministry in a  paper call the Hague letter in one of the craftsman and then judge page  pronounce the judgement of the court to be that he shall pay fine be imprison  for one year and until he shall pay the say fine and likewise till he shall  find surety for his good behaviour for seven year himself to be bind in a  recognizance of and his surety in a recognizance of
Barnardiston king b the king and freeman what shall be say to be a good  warrant of a judge of the court of king bench the defendant have be indict for  a battery and upon that judge lee make out his warrant to take he which  warrant require that the defendant shall be bring before one of the judge and  if none of they be in town then before one of his majesty justice of peace  reside within five mile of London the tipstaff however do not think proper to  execute it and for this Mr Kettleby move for a attachment Lord Raymond say  that precedent may be show of these warrant have be grant time out of mind and  it have be determine that their warrant be good even by parole to arrest a  person commit a offence open before they accord the attachment be grant
Barnardiston king b the king and gibson vide before since this matter come on  before the defendant have be commit by the court and now upon its come on  again it be not think necessary that he shall be bring up by the marshal for  his be in custody be say to be sufficient though this be otherwise in capital  offence for there the prisoner must always be at the bar now motion be make  for a new trial upon the follow exception the indictment charge the defendant  with forge a note purport to be a note under the hand of lady Margaret  Mecartney whereby she acknowledge herself to be indebt to the defendant for  diverse sum of money which she have borrow and receive of he for other sum  which he have pay on her account and likewise for money pay by he for good to  her use which sum amount in the whole to S and then the indictment set forth  the note in haec word but the defendant counsel insist that the purport of the  note be not duly set forth for by the purport of it the good that be mention  be say to have be buy of other by the defendant for the use of the lady but in  the note itself they be say to be deliver by the defendant to the lady and  that may either be by the defendant sell of those good or by his buy they for  her but the court declare their opinion to be that this variance be not make  out because it do not appear by the note but the good deliver may be buy for  her by the defendant but even suppose it to be a variance the chief justice  judge page and judge probin several declare their opinion that it will signify  nothing for as the note be set forth in haec word the declare the purport of  it be only to be consider the sense which the grand jury have of it accord for  these reason the motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b the king and gibson when a defendant be convict upon a  indictment how far he shall not be allow to make any motion relate to the  proceed unless he be present in court on motion to set aside a verdict in a  indictment of forgery Mr strange object that the defendant ought to be present  in court he say he do agree in the case of a special verdict this be not  necessary because there the defendant be not find guilty and of that opinion  the court be in the case of the king and Hays Vol I but in the case of a  motion to set aside a verdict he must be present equal as in motion in arrest  of judgement because a jury have find he guilty of the fact Mr marsh on the  other side submit it that this case be distinguishable from that of arrest of  judgement but say he will look into the case and move this matter again the  next day the chief justice say that he have himself find two or three case  upon this head where the court have be of opinion upon debate that the  defendant must be present in these motion as well as in those in arrest of  judgement for this purpose he mention the case of the king against Lunt and  Woamwelh mich will and that of the queen and Rickbath pasch Ann both in point  and the court be of the same opinion vide postea
Barnardiston king b the king and Greenhill how far a certiorari shall remove a  indictment relate to the highway Mr Theede move for a certiorari to hicks hall  to remove a indictment for not work in the highway the court seem at first to  think that the late statute have take away certiorar in general for remove  indictment concern the highway but Mr Theede say that those statute have  indeed declare that no certiorari shall go upon indictment find on those  statute for not repair the highway but he observe that the present indictment  be find upon the statute of Phil mark and those statute have no retrospect to  former law accord he say certiorar have before go in the case of the king and  Coleman pasch Geo and in the case of the king and echard mich Geo and upon  this the court grant the certiorari in the present case
Barnardiston king b the king and hawk vide ante Mr fazakerly now argue this  case again and rely upon the same exception he take before but the court be  now of opinion that the first exception may be get over they say to be evident  be couple with a speak to be have in law Latin a present signification like a  to look at closely be which must have that sense or else their judgement will  be all bad but however they think the second exception can not be get over the  conviction of the justice be nothing but in the nature of a verdict which find  the fact and therefore they ought to have go on and give the judgement  likewise they do allow that it be not necessary for the justice to apportion  the penalty but it be necessary for they to give judgement that the defendant  shall forfeit the penalty the court mention too the observation that be make  before of the last statute repeal the first by construction and say they be of  the same opinion accord the court quash the conviction
Barnardiston king b the king and hill how far the court will reverse a  judgement in a indictment for felony in a writ of error upon a judgement in a  indictment of felony two error among other be assign one that it do not appear  that the jury be return by the sheriff of the county the other that the  judgement be give against one hall the attorney general say that these be  error in law and therefore he can not confess they though it be frequent to do  so upon a outlawry however he have a authority from the king not to oppose the  reversal of the judgement if the court shall think proper to do it accord the  court say that these be manifest error and upon that reverse the judgement
Barnardiston king b the king and Hugh how far the court will make a rule for  the inspection of particular book belong to a corporation this be a motion  that be make last term for a rule to inspect the pollbook of the corporation  of Liverpool in Lancashire where the name of the person be set down who be  elector of a mayor of that town in order that it may be see who have the  majority of vote at such election the chief justice say then he will make no  particular rule but if the general rule for inspect the public book of the  corporation will do they any service they may take it which accord they do and  motion be now make for a attachment for their not grant they the sight of  these pollbook pursuant to this rule and affidavit be now produce on each side  in order to have the opinion of the court whether they be public book or not  but the chief justice say they need not enter into their affidavit for one of  their officer have show they three rule one in the case of the king and tailor  in queen whether another in the case of the king and sir Peter Delme in queen  whether the other in the case of the king and the city of Norwich in Geo I by  which it appear the court have grant even particular rule in case of this  nature for the inspection of pollbook relate to mayor and alderman so that the  court be of opinion that such pollbook be public book of the corporation and  accord make a rule in this case for the inspection of they of consequence they  say too this fall under the general rule for the inspection of public book but  the chief justice say as the court be very far from be clear in this upon the  first motion they will not grant the attachment Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b the king and jenner how far the court will not grant a  information for a libel notwithstanding the matter may possible be libellous  on rule to show cause why a information shall not go against the defendant for  publish a libel upon one Mr Hayward a winemerchant in the daily advertiser the  substance of the advertisement be this be to give notice that Mr Hayward sell  wine or brandy by the gallon quart or pint and be to be meet with at any hour  every afternoon at one of the tavern in Smithfield N B Mr Hayward sell a  excellent salve make by a relation of his in Dublin to cure woman breast with  which may he have at d a bottle the defendant counsel insist that this be no  libel but Mr fazakerly submit it that it be by reason that it tend to lessen a  man in his trade and make he ridiculous however the court think that it will  be go too far to grant a information for such a paper it be enough to leave  the party to his ordinary remedy accord the rule be discharge
Barnardiston king b the king and jordan when a person be bring up by habeas  corpus how far the court will only remand he the defendant have be bring up by  habeas corpus it appear upon the return that he be commit upon a indictment of  forgery which be to be try in the country this next assize Mr Kettleby move in  behalf of he that he may be turn over to the king bench prison upon a  information grant against he by this court Trin Geo the court upon inquiry of  their officer say that he have appear and plead to that information so that  they have nothing to do with he till conviction upon it for which reason they  order he to be remand
Barnardiston king b the king and lady Lawley how far a master report shall be  say to amount to a conviction the defendant have be examine upon interrogatory  for a libel publish by her on the proceed of the court and the master now  report her in contempt Mr marsh submit it that it appear upon her examination  that what she do be by the instance and direction of her husband and therefore  the punishment ought not to be inflict upon her but upon her husband but if  the court shall be of opinion that she be answerable for this offence at least  the court will bail her till they can be prepare to pass the judgement the  chief justice say that the excuse that have be mention can be none in these  offence though it be in felony and as to bail her the court declare that a  report of the master be in the nature of a conviction and therefore they can  not do it accord the motion be disallow judge lee absent
Barnardiston king b the king and latter the certainty require in a  significavit in order to warrant a excommunicate to take in hand in a writ of  excommunicate to take in hand the significavit set out that the defendant be  excommunicate for not appear to answer interrogatory to be exhibit against he  ex duty for the health of his soul and reformation of his manner Mr Kettleby  move that this writ may be quash first because the defendant name have no  addition to it which the statute of Elizabeth require second because the  offence mention in this significavit be not one of those mention in the  statute three because the interrogatory be not then exhibit and perhaps never  will the chief justice say he do agree that if this excommunication have be  after sentence the significavit must have set forth particular the cause for  which he be excommunicate and therefore where a significavit have set forth  that the defendant be excommunicate for not pay tithe sive alian jura  ecclesiastical it have be hold to be bad but as this be a excommunication for  the party not appear he think it good enough however a rule be make to show  cause judge lee absent vide postea
Barnardiston king b the king and latter vide before Mr fazakerly come now to  show cause he urge the same reason which the chief justice have before mention  accord the rule be discharge ex relatum
Barnardiston king b the king and Laurence and other what shall be a good  appointment of elisors application be make to the court to appoint elisors in  this case who the venire shall be direct to the sheriff and coroner be both  party the counsel say that their be party be enter upon the roll and this the  court say be necessary otherwise it will be error upon the record they say far  that a rule must be make upon the party to attend the master and he must  appoint the elisors accord make a rule to show cause
Barnardiston king b the king and LOFEILD vide ante how far the court will  grant a imparlance in case of information a rule be make absolute for grant a  information against the defendant last easter term but no information be file  against he till this term upon which Mr strange move for a imparlance till  next term and the court grant it Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b the king and long what shall not be take to be a return to  a mandamus a mandamus have be grant by the court against the defendant who be  three justice of peace to put in execution the statute of forcible entry and  now by way of a return to it they send up a inquisition take before a jury  which they have cause to be impanel who find that the party complain of for  the entry extratenuerunt possession thus far extratenent which be only a  indictment for a forcible entry they annex to the writ of mandamus a  certiorari too and two recognizance the counsel say that this return be no  kind of obedience to the writ for the writ command the defendant to clear the  possession of the wrongdoers and put the lawful owner into it whereas they  have only procure they to be indict and therefore for this plain contempt of  the king writ he hope the Barnardiston king b er p court will grant a  attachment against they he say too that there be a case in Geo which be the  king and the justice of Dorchester where a mandamus go to order the justice to  sign a poor rate the justice make a general shuffle return that the rate be  not make secundum sharply parliament and in that case the court grant a  attachment Mr Hussey say that he be counsel in that case and it be grant upon  the present Lord chief baron motion but the court say if it be grant in that  case they believe it be the first in which it ever be but however here they  say they can not take this to be any return to their writ for the certiorari  be enough of itself to bring the indictment up and therefore they will suppose  it come up upon that and accord make a rule upon the defendant to make a  return to it
Barnardiston king b the king and LONGBOTOM and PETTERIS what shall be say to  be a good indictment for subornation of perjury how far different offence can  be join in one indictment vide post Mr strange move to quash a indictment of  subornation of perjury at the suit of the prosecutor one of the exception to  it be that it charge the defendant a bag of hide the dawn with suborn four  witness a bag of hide the dawn to give evidence against one hay and his  brother upon a indictment of forgery he say these be several charge of several  offence and yet contain in one indictment accord he cite the case of Giles and  Gwyn and other where a indictment be hold bad for this very reason it charge  the defendant there a bag of hide the dawn with exercise a trade and not have  serve a apprenticeship he observe too there be another exception to this  indictment for its charge the witness with swear false that hay and his  brother be guilty of the forgery which be too general accord the court make a  rule to show cause
Barnardiston king b the king and lynn how far the court will grant a  information for a notorious offence notwithstanding the fact be total deny on  rule to show cause why a information shall not be grant against the defendant  for force one Elizabeth Mortimer to marry one of the defendant against her  will sergeant birch say that he have affidavit to produce which direct  contradict every one of the fact charge by the affidavit on which the rule be  make judge page say that that be no reason why the court shall not make the  rule absolute in order that so gross a crime may be examine into and so he  remember the court be of the same opinion in the case of one Fazar a  coachmaker wife who be the chief instrument in a villainy of the like nature  accord in the present case the rule be make absolute
Barnardiston king b the king and marsh how far the court will not quash a  indictment for a nuisance on motion to quash a indictment the exception to it  be that it charge the defendant only with dig a ditch in in common pasture  sive vacuo adjungen to a highway ad common nocumenturn of all those who pass  over this void piece of ground now the counsel say it do not appear that such  a Act as this be a common nuisance for the place may be a private property but  the court say they never do quash indictment for common nuisance and therefore  they will not enter into the exception for that will be overturn the very main  design of the rule but where it appear that the court where the indictment be  take have no jurisdiction in those case this court will quash they as in the  case of indictment of perjury at the quartersession
Barnardiston king b the king and morris when a person be indict upon the  statute of Elizabeth for exercise the trade without have serve a  apprenticeship how far the defendant have in fact exercise the trade for seven  year will not be sufficient evidence to acquit he upon such indictment in a  indictment upon the statute of Elizabeth for exercise the trade of a grocer  without have serve a legal apprenticeship the defendant offer to give evidence  of his have exercise this trade for seven year as be matter tantamount to his  have serve a apprenticeship for that time chief justice eyres do allow that  the case have go so far as to allow a wife live in the shop with her husband  for seven year to be equivalent to a apprenticeship but think the present case  not strong enough to comply with the meaning of the statute accord the  evidence be disallow
Barnardiston king b the king and Pixley vide ante BuryAssizes this be a  indictment against the defendant upon the statute of g for assault customhouse  officer in the execution of their office this indictment have be remove up  into the king bench by certiorari and be send down to be try at nisi prius  upon evidence the defendant counsel object that the person assault ought to  show the authority which they act under as customhouse officer the judge say  that he well remember there be a statute which make it unnecessary accord the  objection be overrule Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b the king and porter and other how far a person who own  himself perjure shall not be credit a information be move for against the  defendant for seduce a man wife that be under age to take a great part of her  husband good and deliver they to one of the defendant that be her mother and  for persuade her to swear the peace against her husband whereas the wife come  now and swear that she have no manner of cause to do it and that this  seducement be do only to make vexation between her husband and her but the  court say that they will never grant information upon the oath of a person who  come and say that she before forswear herself
Barnardiston king b the king and rainer vide ante the defendant have be  convict for print a scandalous libel upon the house of lord and Commons call  robin game or seven the main the court now set a fine of pound upon he commit  he for two year and until he shall pay this fine and likewise till he shall  find security for his good behaviour for seven year
Barnardiston king b the king and refit what kind of fee shall be say to be due  to the clerk of a market the defendant have be convict upon a indictment for  take d for examine mark and seal pint pot as servant to one Mr robe clerk of  the market to the king household Mr strange now move in arrest of judgement  and say that it appear by Inst that the fee of a penny be due to the clerk of  the market for mark and seal a pint measure so that there be no offence lie in  the indictment the chief justice say that the court can not judicial take  notice that the fee of a penny be due to the clerk of the market for this part  of his office accord the motion be refuse
Barnardiston king b the king and rise how far the court will quash a coroner  inquest Mr reeves and Mr Verney move to quash a inquisition take by the  coroner of ken upon two exception one for matter appear upon the inquisition  the other for matter appear by affidavit out of it the case state upon the  inquisition be that one stone be drive a wagon down a hill that the horse  begin to run very violent upon which the wagoner leap out of the wagon and  thereby one of the wheel go over he and kill he and so the inquisition find  that that wheel move to his death the counsel upon this observe that this be a  false find in judgement of law upon the face of the inquisition for undoubted  the whole wagon and all the horse in it move to his death and the lord of the  manor be entitle to they as a forfeiture but they say beside that they have  affidavit from six of the juryman that the coroner direct they to find that  the wheel only move to his death and in his charge tell they that the law be  so and if he have not inform they so they shall have give in their verdict  otherwise the court say that if this matter stand single upon what be find by  the inquisition they shall have clear think that this court can do nothing in  it because the jury be the only judge of what move to the party death or not  and so judge page say he remember the court be of that opinion in the case of  the king and clark then as to the other matter they be in doubt whether they  can go out of the inquisition in this case judge page say in case a judge of  assize misdirects a jury he think there be no way to come at that but by a  bill of exception however Mr Verney say that he have know case where it have  be hold that the court will grant a new trial in such case and Mr reeves say  that he be satisfy be can find authority to show that the court have set aside  these inquisition upon affidavit accord they make a rule to show cause vide  post
Barnardiston king b the king and rouse vide ante when a man be convict of  forgery or perjury the court say they never allow of any motion to be make in  behalf of he but upon his be bring into court though upon a conviction for a  trespass or not they do Ven
Barnardiston king b the king and savage how far a attorney have no authority  to receive a sum of money belong to his client without a order for that  purpose Mr reeves move for a attachment against the attorney for the  prosecutor for take out a attachment against the defendant for not pay in  pursuance of a rule of nisi prius which he have enter into and be make a rule  of this court whereas the prosecutor himself order the defendant not to pay  the money to the attorney it appear too that the defendant have pay the  prosecutor the money before he be take up upon the attachment and yet he be  force to give bail to it below the court say they do not know a attorney have  any power to receive money agree to be pay in such a manner without a express  authority from his client accord they make a rule upon he to attend though  refuse to grant a attachment king v rouse Barnardiston king b er report date  the king and rouse how far a person that be convict of a crime need not be  present in court at the time he make a motion in that prosecution vide post Mr  reeves move that a order may be make upon Mr Pember to let the defendant have  a sight of the venire and the other process but Mr strange say the defendant  be convict of forgery and therefore can move nothing without be present in  court but the court observe that this be only a complaint against au officer  for refuse to let the defendant have a sight of what he have a right to and  therefore the motion be proper in the manner it be make and accord grant it
Barnardiston king b the king and smith when a commitment be return upon a  habeas corpus how far the court will discharge the prisoner the defendant have  be bring up by habeas corpus from Oxford gaol and notice have be give to the  judge of the court of Oxford who commit he Barnardiston king b er p that he  will move to be discharge Mr strange take several exception to the return in  the first place he say the commitment be for the defendant not give pound bail  to the answer a complaint in causan in an unjust manner now he observe that  the commitment ought to have set forth that there be a affidavit make of the  cause of action be pound in order to the justify the court below in hold the  defendant to bail in so great a sum for he submit it if that court have any  right to hold bail at all the statute that have be make for ascertain the bail  must extend to that jurisdiction as well as to other but he insist upon it far  that that court have no right to hold to bail at all the civil law be the law  which that court proceed by and by that law there be no right of hold to bail  whatsoever he say likewise that he apprehend the word in causan in an unjust  manner be word entire of a uncertain signification they will extend to a  ejectment as well as to other action and in a ejectment that court have no  jurisdiction these objection he observe may be make to the very foundation of  the commitment but then he submit it in the next place that the commitment be  wrong in point of form for by the commitment the bedel of the university be  only order to take he and carry he to gaol No direction be hereby give to the  gaoler to receive he nor do it appear what gaol he be to be carry to accord  the court discharge he
Barnardiston king b the king and Stephens how far the court will not grant a  information for bribery on rule to show cause why a information shall not be  grant against the defendant for receive a bribe of pound to give his vote as  one Mr price shall direct he in the borough of NewRadnor the state of the case  as it appear now before the court be that one single person make affidavit  that the defendant tell he that Mr price do give he such a sum of money for  such a purpose and the defendant make affidavit that he never do receive such  a sum and Mr price that he never give he such a one the chief justice judge  page and judge probin be of opinion that the rule ought to be discharge and  the party leave to take his ordinary remedy by way of indictment but judge lee  be of opinion that the rule ought to be make absolute because the defendant  have not deny that he ever tell the other person that he have such bribe for  which reason he think that there be sufficient confess to try this fact in a  information however all the court agree in this that if the fact have be swear  by one single evidence on one side and positive deny by the party oath on the  other that no information ought to go accord the rule be discharge in the  present case
Barnardiston king b the king and Stoughton what shall be a good indictment for  stop of a highway in a indictment for stop up a way a exception be take to it  for uncertainty in that the defendant be charge quod One hedge to lift up well  to lift up causavi Barnardiston king b er p and that he continue the nuisance  for several month the case of the king and Stocker Mod be cite in point and  likewise that of the king and Brereton mich Geo where little book to scratch  seu scribe causavi be hold bad the chief justice say that he remember that  case be argue full but do not know that ever final judgement be give and be  afraid if that shall be allow many judgement will be reverse however Mr  masterman say the form of these indictment be only quod little book to scratch  scribe causavi and not or and Mr fazakerly say that he remember the pronounce  final judgement in that case the counsel of the other side though endeavour to  supply the defect in this part of the indictment by another part of it where  the nuisance be lie to be continue and cite the case of the king and ware  where he say the defendant be charge in one part of the indictment with forge  a receipt in the other with publish it the forgery be lie imperfect but yet  the court hold he may be convict for the publication the court say they do not  think these case be alike because there the forgery and publication be lie as  distinct fact in different part of the indictment but here one fact be lie  only as a continuance of the other in the same part of it however this matter  be order to stand over
Barnardiston king b the king and Strudwick how far the court grant a habeas  corpus returnable immediate although faint upon a return to a habeas corpus  direct to the warden of the fleet that the prisoner be faint Mr Peer William  produce two affidavit from apothecary swear today that the prisoner may safe  be bring up and therefore move for another habeas corpus returnable immediate  although faint in order that he may be charge in custody with a excommunicate  to take in hand Mr Yates on the other side produce a affidavit swear yesterday  that the prisoner life will be in danger if he be bring up the court say that  this affidavit be by no mean of so much weight as the other two and therefore  grant the motion upon which he be immediate bring up and the excommunicate to  take in hand be read direct to the sheriff of London accord the court say he  must be commit to Newgate for that be the sheriff of London prison but then a  habeas corpus be produce out of the common plea to charge he with action in  that court upon which he be remand
Barnardiston king b the king and tailor how far the court will quash a  indictment for slander sergeant girdler move to quash a indictment which  charge the defendant with be false accuser common peace disturberess he say he  suppose this be intend to be a indictment for a scold but he observe that  rixatrix be the technical word for that purpose he say the case of the queen v  Saxbey mich Ann be strong than this the indictment there charge the defendant  with be common violent or noisy quarrel pugnatrix sergeant Parker say there  that the meaning of that charge be that the defendant be a common fighter in  her scold but notwithstanding that indictment be quash Mr Moreton on the other  side argue that there be many case where a fix certainty in expression seem  equal necessary as in the present case and yet the law will allow the sense to  be convey by various expression so that they be equal significant to convey  the meaning he observe that the statute of forcible entry require that the  party shall be actual expel from his freehold before he shall be within the  relief of that law the meaning of which expression natural import that the  party shall by force be first personal remove from it yet it have be hold that  disseiziverunt be as good in a indictment upon that statute as expuleru but  certain a seize may be where a person be off the possession a expulsion only  where he be actual upon it but the court say rixatrix have be always hold to  be a technical word they say too that they do not think the meaning of the  present indictment be to express a scold but one that sovus slander and make  disturbance and then it be bad for be too general so accord quash it  Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b the king and the bishop OF lincoln vide ante Mr reeves now  cite Rep in point and say that he submit it that will be enough for make the  rule absolute in order that the party may declare in prohibition but Mr Filmer  on the other side mention the case of Barker and wharton where this point be  determine direct to the contrary and so the chief justice say it be in the  case of wright and Allen mich g for which reason he think that the other case  can not be law judge lee say that he be well satisfy that in every settle  jurisdiction it be too late to apply for a prohibition unless defect of  jurisdiction appear upon the face of the proceed but the doubt Barnardiston  king b er p with he be whether in those instance where there be a jurisdiction  only in particular circumstance the admission of the party can preclude the  court from support the right of the crown for this purpose he cite Inst where  he do not think that what be lie down can be maintain unless it be apply to  some such case as this accord the court enlarge the rule far vide post
Barnardiston king b the king and the churchwarden OF the parish OF WILKINTON  how far the court will grant a mandamus to require person to make a equal rate  for the relief of the poor Mr Fazackerly move as a motion of course for a  mandamus to be direct to the churchwarden to make a equal rate but the court  say they always expect a affidavit in these case which Mr Fazackerly accord  produce but the content of it only be that there have be a unequal rate and  that rate be quash the court say it do not appear but the new rate that they  will make may be equal Mr Fazackerly say that the reason for his make his  motion in the manner he do be not real upon a complaint that the churchwarden  will make a unequal rate a rate only he want but he say he choose to word his  motion in the manner he do because he believe the rule must be draw up so and  if it be draw up only for a rate in general the other side when they shall  come to show cause may object that it be not make in pursuance of the word of  the statute the court say that may be necessary accord the rule be order to be  draw up in that manner for a equal rate
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF abbotslangley vide ante the  court now be clear of opinion that the order of removal be good they say they  can never see any reason for allow constructive notice upon the statute of  James and therefore confirm the order
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF BENJOE vide ante S C how  far a purchaser shall gain a settlement within Geo on rule to show cause why a  order of session shall not be quash the case appear to be that a man have  purchase a acre of ground within this parish which he pay for and then build a  house upon it which he live in for nine month and afterward sell the whole for  upon which the justice at the session adjudge that by this purchase he gain a  settlement within the statute of Geo and now for cause Mr reeves show that  though that statute only provide that whoever shall pay for the purchase of  land in any parish shall gain a settlement by it yet such a purchase as in the  case in question be within the reason of that Act for it be more probable that  a person who can give for a piece of ground and lie out so much money upon it  as he do will not be a charge to that parish than a person who can afford bare  to give for such a purchase and these act relate to the poor be he say to be  take by equity and for this purpose cite a case upon the stat of W m where it  be hold that the service of a unmarried person have child that be grow up and  get a settlement elsewhere be within the equity of that statute so he say upon  that statute it be hold too that if a person be in possession of a freehold or  copyhold or even a leasehold estate he need not give notice to gain he a  settlement however the court seem pretty clear in their opinion that such a  purchase as in the present case be not within the benefit of the statute of  Geo because it by no mean comply with the term of it and they be not to  consider whether such a person as this be so likely to become Chargeable as  the other for that will lead they into a wile enquiry however judge probin say  that he do not know whether this case may not fall within the statute of car  the court be in some doubt as to this last point so it stand over
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF Handsworth how far a  certiorari lie to remove a indictment for not repair a bridge on rule to show  cause why a certiorari shall not be quash which be grant for remove up a  indictment for not repair a bridge out of the quartersession sergeant Corbet  say that this rule for show cause be obtain upon the statute of Ann but the  present indictment be against the inhabitant of a parish by which it appear a  trial of right may come in question and therefore he submit it this case be  not within the meaning of that clause in the statute he say the whole of this  statute be find upon a former one of Henry but he insist that statute can not  be construe to give the session a jurisdiction when the justice of the session  must be party interest and he say he very well remember certiorar have be  grant in these case though he do allow they be not grant upon debate and  particular he mention the case of the king and the inhabitant of Mitcham in  Surre on his own motion he say beside that the present indictment be actual  remove up and therefore that he hope will be a far reason for discharge the  rule the court say the second reason do not seem to they sufficient to  discharge the rule upon but the first do and accord the rule for show cause be  discharge
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF HOLIBORN when part of the  land which a person occupy lie in one parish and part in another which of the  parish his settlement belong to vide post S c motion be make to quash a order  of two justice and a order of session confirm it the case be special state  that a man rend a farm of per annum and that part of the land to the value of  per annum lie in one parish and that the other part lie in another parish upon  which the justice be of opinion that he gain no settlement by this mean  exception be now take to the order upon this account because the farm be  consider as one entire interest and therefore where the great part of it be  there the settlement shall be accord the court make a rule to show cause
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF Mansfield what shall not be  say to be a good order of removal on rule to show cause why a order shall not  be quash the exception to it be first that the order be of the removal of a  man and his wife and it be not say that any complaint be of the officer belong  to the place from whence the removal S to that it be answer that the fact  appear to be contrary another that the order require the parish to who it be  direct to receive they or either of they which it be say be uncertain for  accord as it stand there the receive one of they only will be sufficient but  the court say that there be reason for pen it in that manner for the design be  that the parish shall receive one only if both can not be find to belong to  they a three that the county be in the margin only and not mention in the body  of the order and this exception Mr Abney say have be allow on his motion in  the case of the king and the inhabitant of Aydelthorp and some other Mr  strange say in those case possible there be no reference to the margin as here  there be but the chief justice seem to think this exception fatal and he  mention the case of the king and Austin in which he think this have be allow  then another exception be take which the whole court allow and that be that  the statute of h require these session to be hold at state time and the Feast  of saint Thomas the martyr be one of they but it appear that this session be  not hold within a week after that day and though it be say per adjournment it  do not appear to be within the time accord the order be go to be quash but Mr  Abney make a proposal that the whole merit may be refer to a judge of assize  the court do nothing in it side Ven
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF melton how far a person  shall gain a settlement in a will motion be make to quash a order of session  discharge a order of two justice for the removal of the widow of John coke and  several child John coke remove himself with his family from the parish of  Stapleford with a certificate and live in a will within the parish of Milton  which will maintain its own poor and occupy there a tenement of per annum and  at the same time rend a tenement of per annum in the parish at large the two  justice be of opinion this gain a settlement in the parish of Milton and the  motion now make be that the order of session discharge that order may be  itself discharge and the court make a rule to show case vide post
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF MOLTSWORTH how far a person  gain a settlement by live as a servant Mr reeves move that a order of two  justice may be quash which be make for the removal of a certain poor person  from the parish of gore to the parish of Moltsworth the case as state in the  order be that this man have gain a settlement in the parish of Moltsworth but  afterward let himself for a year and serve for that year to two person that be  partner in a boat in the parish of gore but it be far state in the order that  this man do not live in the whole year forty day in the parish of gore but ply  with the boat in diverse other parish notwithstanding which Mr reeves say he  shall submit it that this person settlement be in the parish of gore he do  agree it have be resolve that if a person let we himself in a particular  parish to go a shipboard and he accord do go without serve forty day in that  parish such service will not gain he a settlement but he submit it that case  do not come up to the present one because there it appear the intent of the  party be that the parish where he be hire in shall have no benefit of his  service but here the servant be bind only to ply with his boat from this  parish to other parish thereabouts and therefore though in fact he may not  have reside for forty day within that parish yet that be only accidental and  consequent the servant gain a good settlement by such service beside he say he  shall submit it that the construction of this part of the order which find  that he do not serve for forty day in this parish may very well be that be do  not serve for forty day together and then unquestionable this will be a good  settlement the court however be of opinion that this order must be understand  to mean that the servant do not reside in this parish for forty day in the  whole at any different time within the year and then they say their opinion be  that this be not a good settlement accord confirm the order
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF utoxeter vide ante the  chief justice now deliver the resolution of the court upon this matter he say  they be all of opinion that one part of the order of session be bad which  appoint overseer over the three will because it do not appear whether they  intend to appoint they over the three will joint or over each of they separate  but the rest of the order they think be good accord the first part of it be  quash and the rest confirm
Barnardiston king b the king and the inhabitant OF WOODSTERTON concern what  thing justice of peace can make a order upon overseer this be a order of two  justice make upon the officer of the parish of Woodsterton for pay pound upon  account of a poor inhabitant of that town when he be in gaol and likewise for  pay a surgeon bill that be due upon his account which order have be confirm at  the session Mr Wirley move that both may be quash by reason of several  exception to the original order first that it be not say in the order that it  be make under hand and seal second that it do not appear to have be make upon  examine the party on his oath three that it be neither aver in the order that  the justice who make it live within the parish nor that there be no justice  live within it one of which averment ought necessary to have be make fourthly  that the previous step of apply to a vestry or two overseer of the parish be  not observe which ought to have be by the statute of Geo accord the court make  a rule to show cause vide post
Barnardiston king b the king and the mayor bailiff and commonalty OF exeter  affidavit be now produce that the bank of the river be much out of repair and  that it will be very mischievous if there be not some speedy relief give the  court make the rule absolute
Barnardiston king b the king and the mayor OF shrewsbury when there be  occasion to produce a book in evidence and there be rasure in it what kind of  order shall be make by the court concern the produce it Mr fazakerly move that  the officer that have the custody of the public book of the corporation may  attend with they at the trial upon a affidavit that there be a rasure in one  of they judge page say that he never know that the court make a order upon the  officer in such case to attend with any more of the book than the affidavit  swear there be rasure in and that too be never grant but upon the party be at  the cost of it that make the motion accord a rule be only make in this case  that the officer shall attend with that particular book at the prosecutor  expense judge probin absent
Barnardiston king b the king and which how far a affirmation of a Quaker shall  not be good evidence upon a information in a information against two person  for a misdemeanour a affirmation of a Quaker be offer to be read but the court  observe that the affirmation of such person be never allow in evidence in a  criminal prosecution and therefore refuse its be read in this case
Barnardiston king b the king and Willis how far the court will direct that a  venire facias de to make new shall be award here be two indictment but by  mistake the panel of the jury that be to try Bromley be return upon williss  distringa and the panel of the jury that be to try Willis be return upon  bromley distringa for which reason the court think that both indictment be try  by person without authority accord order venire faciass de to make new to be  award cro
Barnardiston king b the parish OF Horsington against the parish OF  NORTHFETHERTON vide ante this matter come now on again the court declare their  opinion that the order make the upon the parish of Horsington can not be  maintain and though Mr reeves submit it that if a man be remove by the name of  John and that be his wrong name yet he may at any time be remove by the name  of Thomas be his right name the court say they take the law to be otherwise  for there be as much reason for the parish to which he be remove to take such  exception to the order of removal within time as any other then as to the two  exception take by judge probin upon the former argument to the first order he  and the rest of the court now agree that they can be no force for as to the  order be say to be make upon due examination and other circumstance they be of  opinion that the word other circumstance shall be reject as surplasage and as  to the age of the child Barnardiston king b er p be not mention they say the  justice have adjudge the parish of Northfetherton to be the place of the last  legal settlement of the child and therefore the age of the child need not be  set forth accord the last order be quash and the original order confirm
Barnardiston king b thomas and bishop how far bill of exchange shall be say to  be void by reason of the uncertainty of the fund out of which the money be  require to be pay in a action bring by the plaintiff upon a bill of exchange  the bill be draw in these word may sir at day sight pray pay this my first  bill of exchange the second not pay unto John somervile or order the sum of  pound sterling value receive of he and place the same to the account of the  yorkbuilding company as by letter of advice to Burgundy bishop cashier of the  yorkbuilding company at their house in winchesterstreet London the defendant  accept this bill and sign his name to it Burgundy bishop the trial in this  cause come on at the sit before judge page and he direct the jury to find a  verdict for the plaintiff which they accord do Mr Kettleby now move for a new  trial and submit it that as the bill be draw on the cashier of the  yorkbuilding company on the company account the action ought to have be  against the company or at least against the defendant as servant to they and  so this ought to have appear upon the face of the declaration but the present  declaration be against the defendant personal in his own right and therefore  he submit it that the evidence do not maintain it the court say they can not  give a opinion upon this matter without see the bill itself and the plaintiff  attorney have not the bill here accord this matter stand over judge probin  absent vide postea
Barnardiston king b thomas and bishop vide before this matter come on again Mr  Kettleby insist that there be some other circumstance appear at the trial  which make the case more clear in favour of the defendant the person that draw  the bill be Mr Charles Mildmay who be employ by the company to act as servant  for they at Fronshen in Scotland at this place the bill be draw and from this  place the letter of advice be date which be direct to the governor and court  of assistant of the yorkbuilding company at their house in winchesterstreet  London in pursuance of this letter the governor and court of assistant meet  and make a order upon the defendant to accept the bill which fact the  defendant be prepare at the trial to prove but the judge refuse to admit  evidence of it upon these circumstance Mr Kettleby submit it that the  plaintiff have a good remedy against the company that he have no remedy  against the servant and therefore for the misdirection of the judge he hope a  new trial shall be grant the court say this be not a bill draw upon the  company but a bill draw upon the defendant the direction of the bill to  Humphrey bishop cashier of the company c be only a description of his person  Barnardiston king b er p for the better find of he and what account he be to  place the money to when he have pay it they think be not material they say  they think no evidence ought to be admit in these case that be extrinsic of  the bill where action be bring by endorsees as the present one be accord the  rule be discharge
Barnardiston king b Throgmorton and smith when a ejectment be bring by a  infant how far the court will direct that the infant shall nominate a good  lessee in order to be answerable for the cost of the suit in ejectment Mr  strange move that the lessor of the plaintiff be a infant may nominate a good  lessee for the plaintiff or else that proceed may be stay the reason for make  this motion he say be that otherwise there will be no one who the defendant  can recover his cost against and the same thing he observe be do in the case  of Noke and Windham east Geo Mr Abney on the other side say that he submit it  this motion be entire needless for that as he apprehend the lessor of the  plaintiff will be oblige to pay cost he take notice that in Leon it be hold  that a infant may make a lease to try a title and in keb be the opinion of  Twisden that this rule will subject the infant to pay the cost but judge lee  say that he well remember the case of Noke and Windham before cite and he be  of counsel in it the defendant there move for a trial at bar and likewise that  the lessor of the plaintiff may nominate a good plaintiff and on the rule to  show cause for that purpose it be the declare opinion of the court that such  motion ought to be grant upon which Mr gapper who be one of the counsel for  the lessor of the plaintiff consent that the lessors father shall be make  plaintiff the court be of the same opinion in this case accord they make a  rule for this purpose nisi on Saturday
Barnardiston king b TULLEY and spark this matter be state in page and now upon  a rule nisi it be show that the condition of the bind be if the heir executor  c of the obligor shall pay that sum and yet the plaintiff have only aver that  the executor do not pay it whereas he ought to have say that neither the heir  nor the executor do pay it the court think that this exception can not be get  over but it be order to be speak to again there be another thing that the  chief justice say too in this case and that be a reason which he give for the  plaintiff set out the condition special in the declaration which be that if he  have declare in the common way the defendant in his plea of bankruptcy will  have infallible succeed for he will not have pray oyer of the condition but  direct plead the certificate in bar afterward the plaintiff think it best to  discontinue which accord they do
Barnardiston king b TULLEY and spark vide ante how far a judgement may be  amend this matter now come on to be argue again the form of the judgement as  enter upon record be therefore to look at closely be quod to express grief  recupere debt is owed predict nor twenty two libras quas to hold up tam  occasion adjournment debt is owed predict how pro custagiis nunc hic adjudge  the amendment pray be that the word ex assent to express grief may be insert  between the word nunc hic and adjudge the chief justice now as well as judge  Reynolds upon the former argument declare they think the defendant can not  take advantage of this error and therefore that the amendment be unnecessary  but however the whole court now in general agree that the amendment shall be  make and give rule accord
Barnardiston king b TULLEY and spark vide ante S C how far the court will give  liberty that a person shall inspect proceed under a commission of bankruptcy  vide post S C the defendant not be able to get copy of the proceed in the  commission of bankrupcy upon account of the rule not be draw up right the  court order it to be draw up in this manner that the defendant shall have  liberty to take copy at his own expense of all the proceed upon the commission  of bankrupcy that be in the plaintiff hand the counsel seem to make some doubt  too whether the bind give to the chancellor must not be set forth in the plead  as well as the petition but the court say that be never give in evidence upon  a issue of bankrupcy and consequent there can be no occasion to set it forth  in the plead
Barnardiston king b TULLEY and spark vide ante S C page vide post S C page the  defendant intend to plead bankrupcy and therefore he have make a former motion  to have the commission assign to he but the court say the can only give he  leave to take copy of it and now he mention again the necessity of have the  commission itself because he be oblige to plead it with a profert in cur and  therefore the plaintiff may demand oyer of it but the court say if oyer be  demand they will help he so make no far rule than their former another thing  the court be of opinion of too upon a former argument in this case and that be  that the very petition to my Lord chancellor for the commission be necessary  to be set forth
Barnardiston king b turner and Moreton construction on the statute of g which  require that law proceed shall be in English this be a declaration of mich  term last wherein the damage be lie to pound but the find of the jury under  pound the proceed be all in English Mr Kettleby object that they ought to have  be in Latin and for this cause move in arrest of judgement he do agree that  most of the exception that have be take of this sort have be the other way but  as the court have not yet come to a resolution concern what construction the  statute of Geo ought to receive he submit it the court will make a rule to  show cause which accord they do vide postea
Barnardiston king b washer and smith ux how far a person shall be entitle or  not to more cost than damage notwithstanding the damage be under shilling on  rule to show cause why the plaintiff shall not have more cost than damage in a  action of assault and battery by reason that the damage be under shilling and  that there be no certificate from the judge of the battery be sufficient prove  Mr marsh say that the defendant have special justify in this case by a calmly  manus to place upon upon the plaintiff for his enter into the defendant garden  by which the defendant have admit the assault and battery for which reason he  apprehend that the certificate of the judge be unnecessary Mr Filmer on the  other side say that the statute which he find his former motion upon be the d  of Ch and the construction upon this Act may possible have be that there shall  be no occasion for a certificate where the defendant by his plea express admit  a battery which be the case where he plead de son assault demesne though he  observe that he never remember even that point determine but in the present  case he submit it that the defendant have not confess battery but only a  assault for which reason he apprehend that the rule ought to be make absolute  judge lee incline to be of that opinion and say that the word of the Act be  that the plaintiff shall recover no more cost that damage in these instance  unless where a judge certify that the battery be sufficient prove and he doubt  whether the battery be confess in this case the chief justice and judge page  incline to be of a different opinion and judge page say that he remember Lord  holt will allow a smart beat to be admit by this plea accord the rule be  enlarge vide post
Barnardiston king b Watkins and west this matter be mention in page and now  the court be of opinion that the plea be bad and that the army pron  interrog   can not make it good for that be only a conclusion and therefore will be of no  further service than the premise will warrant it the case though of Sullivan  and Seagrave which be determine about two year ago be cite by the defendant  counsel and that be the case of a writ of error go out of this court to Thomas  Witchet chief justice of the king bench in Ireland and a return be make to it  sign by Thomas Witchet without his title of chief justice it be object there  that it do not appear that the person to who the writ of error be direct and  the person who make a return to it be the same person but yet the court hold  it to be good in that case but the court say that that case do not at all  warrant this for there beside the name Thomas Witchit it be further add prout  within I take or receive in advance then as to the other point which be  mention last term in relation to the demurrer the court be of opinion that  this defect in the plea may be take advantage of in the manner that it be for  they say the defendant have make no justification of what they do as they have  not show the bailiff of the court and the borough to be one and the same  person Mr marsh though say he will take a exception to the declaration for  charge the defendant with take One copper cauldron England a brass kettle  whereas lebes be a ancient Latin word signify a kettle only in general and not  a brass one but the court say as the Latin be good they will then reject the  English and so give judgement for the plaintiff lev
Barnardiston king b wats and goodman how far the plaintiff need never demurrer  special to a plea in abatement the defendant plead a plea in abatement as a  plea in bar by conclude therefore petit quod revelation empty upon which the  plaintiff demurrer general and the court say such a general demurrer be good  and judge Reynolds declare that in no case a person be oblige to demurrer  special upon a plea in abatement for it be not within any of the statute for  the amendment of the law
Barnardiston king b web and urlin how far plead double shall not be permit of  in action to be bring on penal statute a motion be make to plead double in a  action who tam but the court look into the Act for the amendment of the law  which allow these plead upon motion and find a express proviso in it against  allow they in action upon penal statute
Barnardiston king b webster and guering how far the bail shall not be  discharge notwithstanding the plaintiff declare for more than be contain in  the ac etian this be a question that have be long depend whether the declare  for more than be contain in the ac etian discharge the bail entire or whether  they shall still be liable pro tanto in the case of mile and Wourlidge the  court indeed be of opinion that the declare and have judgement too for more  than be contain in the ac etian do discharge they whole but Mr strange say  there be a great deal of difference between that case and this and he say the  last time when this be speak to Lord chief justice produce a rule make in the  case of Wyatt and Evans direct in point that the bail shall be liable pro  tanto Mr marsh though on the other side cite the case of Kenybaldo and Cognoni  where Lord chief justice holt be full of opinion that the bail be in such case  discharge entire the court seem to be of opinion that the bail be liable but  upon Mr marsh undertake to speak to it the first week in next term they  enlarge the rule vide cro and where it appear that the have judgement for more  than be contain in the writ be error Mod
Barnardiston king b well and smith how far a writ of error quod in person thou  shall not be say to be a supersedeas till bail be give to it Mr agar move to  set aside a execution for its be take out after a writ of error quod in person  thou allow and likewise for its be sue out by a wrong name the court accord  make a rule to show cause but judge lee say it deserve to be consider whether  a writ of error quod in person thou be a supersedeas till bail give vide  postea
Barnardiston king b well and smith vide before Mr agar now move that the  second writ of execution may be set aside for its be take out the that of may  which be within term and yet test the last day of last term returnable the  that of June he likewise move that they may give bail to this writ of error  that thereupon it may be a supersedeas and that the defendant in error may  bring in the roll and have the judgement docket in order that the plaintiff  may assign his error judge lee say that certain bail must be put in upon this  writ of error as it be after a verdict as well as upon any other and so this  point be determine in the case of Merryfeild and uvellen Trin g but judge page  think this motion too special to be make without notice accord the court  direct Mr agar to file his affidavit give notice to the other side and move  this matter again judge probin absent vide postea Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b well and Southwell of what term common bail must be file  on motion to set aside a judgement for the common bail not be file for the  defendant the same term in which the writ be returnable the writ be returnable  the first day of hill term last and the common bail not be file till easter  term follow the court refer this matter to the master judge probin absent
Barnardiston king b Wilcox and Huggins vide ante Vol I this matter now come on  to be argue again the court declare themselves unanimous in opinion that  wherever the statute of limitation take place in the time of a testator it  shall run on in the time of the executor and though the action bring by the  testator to take the case out of the statute can proper be say to be continue  in the time of the executor yet the executor must commence his action within a  reasonable time after the probate of the will and so must a administrator  within a reasonable time after letter of administration grant of the  reasonableness of that time the court they say be the proper judge the chief  justice and judge lee declare their opinion to be that the statute prescribe a  year as a reasonable time in another case be a proper rule to guide the  discretion of the court in this but as in the present case the plaintiff have  lie by a very unreasonable time the court pronounce their judgement for the  defendant Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b williams and elm when debt be bring upon a recognizance  against bail after a writ of error be bring upon the principal judgement upon  what term the court will stay proceed in such action debt upon a recognizance  of bail be bring after writ of error allow upon the principal judgement Mr  marsh say that it be true the writ of error be no supersedeas in this action  but yet in the case of Arthur and Myonet the court stay the proceed against  the bail upon their enter into a rule to surrender the principal in four day  after affirmance of the judgement or pay the condemnation money and therefore  he pray the like rule in this case which the court grant Barnardiston king b  er p
Barnardiston king b WINCHLET and HURGHLEY when a action be bring against the  endorsor of a promissory note how far it need not be set forth in the  declaration that any demand be make upon the drawer in a action against the  endorsor of a promissory note there be a special demurrer to the declaration  because there be no demand set forth to have be make upon the drawer Mr tailor  however move for judgement for the plaintiff and no body be on the other side  the court give judgement accord chief justice absent
Barnardiston king b wright and york how far a person shall be entitle to a  imparlance on rule to show cause why a judgement shall not be set aside that  be sign upon the new rule relate to case where the cause of action be set out  in the writ the exception take be that the writ be in the to hold off only but  the declaration in the debet and to hold off and therefore by the rule of the  court they be entitle to a imparlance but it be object by the other side that  the defendant have demand oyer and thereby have waive the benefit of a  imparlance however the court say they know of no such rule and accord set the  judgement aside Barnardiston king b er p
Barnardiston king b yark and keet vide ante Mr prime now come to show cause  and say that the issue have be make up and notice of trial give though  afterward countermand and therefore he submit it the motion for change the  venue be now too late but judge page and judge lee be only in court make the  rule absolute
BARNEHURST against Yelverton a administrator recover in debt against a the  Administration be revoke yet the administrator sue a and take he in execution  supersedeas be award because the execution erronice emandvit for be can sue he  to execution after the Administration be revoke and if in such a case a have  escape the gaoler may well plead that in discharge
Barneshurst versus Yelverton hill James the plaintiff as administrator of I S  bring a action of debt against the defendant upon a bind and obtain judgement  and afterward the administration be revoke yet notwithstanding the plaintiff  proceed and take the defendant in execution and upon a motion in the court the  court hold the execution void and that the defendant ought to be discharge  because it issue out erroneous for the letter of administration be revoke the  power of the plaintiff be go and determine for he prosecute the suit in  another right and be but a minister of the ordinary and then when the ground  of the suit be overthrow to wit his commission he have no authority to proceed  further and the execution issue without warrant and the like law upon a  judgement have upon a administrator the second administrator shall not have  execution by it for he have no privity to the record which mark to plead a  appearance and not say prout to stand open per record nought
barnet versus Tompkins pasch W m skin in action of debt upon a bind the  defendant plead the statute of usury and that it be upon a usurious contract c  it appear by the evidence that the plaintiff wife use to lend money to be pay  by the week and that she lend to the defendant to be pay S a week and one  shilling and six penny by the week for interest and the defendant pay the  interest amount to S when the money be lend which the wife exact and receive  holt c j this be a usurious contract by the husband sufficient to discharge  and avoid the obligation in a civil action but not enough to charge the  husband criminal and it be find for the defendant action of debt do not lie  for interest money though the borrower promise payment with interest but it be  to be recover in damage in a action on the case holt KB er p wager OF law
barney and HARDISTY a to know facias be bring to revive a judgement against  the testator who die and a exception be take by the executor first because  there ought to be one cognizant fa against he after the death of the testator  second that here two cognizant facias S issue both be grant at one and the  same time and the first within a day or two before that the second cognizant  fa be returnable the which as it be say be against the rule and reason of the  law that a writ shall issue after the time in which it be returnable and that  the subject shall not have due notice but though he search and inquire yet by  the take of the writ out within a day that the second to know facias be  returnable all his care do not avail he but execution will go though he have a  release to plead or any other matter and will appear before the return of the  first to know facias or have good by which he may be summon at the time of the  date of the first to know facias yet in all these case nichil shall be return  though the party have good or will appear and plead to which the court assent  but in regard of the constant practice which be to sue both the to know facias  S at once they seem to allow this practice in regard that there ought to be a  fall time between the date of the second to know facias and the return of it  and in c b there be but one to know facias only except in the case of a  executor and in that case there ought to be two to know facias S award in this  case Skinner Jones be cite and holt chief justice say that he never hold the  resolution as to the testatum there to be law Skinner er p
barney versus tyson the case be thus the plaintiff in the life of his father  be about twentysix year of age and have occasion for money prevail with the  defendant to let he have in ware to the value of l and give he bind for l to  be pay if he survive his father at which time a estate will befall he of l per  annum and he have survive his father he prefer his bill against the defendant  to compel he to take his principal money and interest and it be prove in the  case that the defendant be inform at the time of this bargain that the father  be ill and not like to live and he do live but a year and half after and that  one Stisted a man very infamous be employ in the transaction of this bargain  and the plaintiff obtain a decree in the time of the Lord chancellor finch and  now upon a petition to the Lord keeper north the defendant obtain a rehear and  in maintenance of the decree it be allege that the hazard which be run be very  little and such bargain with heir be much to be discountenance the Lord keeper  affirm the decree but say that he will not have it use as a precedent for this  court to set aside man bargain but this case have receive a determination and  the defendant have accept his principal money and interest thereupon and there  be only a slight omission in the enrolment of the decree which if it have be  do have prevent a rehear and the defendant have delay his application to he by  petition he will not now set the decree aside Ventris boundary pasche year car  two in cancellar
Barnsley against archer defendant be arrest for a debt under apply to be  discharge as a seaman in his majesty service under statute g c on plaintiff  part it be barn er p show that defendant be armourer on board the wager man of  war and urge that he ought not to be consider as a private seaman but as a  officer and consequent be not within the statute to this it be answer for  defendant that all these petit inferior person not commission officer armourer  gunner c be listen as common seaman and be no otherwise distinguish from the  rest than by better pay but be liable to be disrate and reduce and do duty as  common seaman at the captain pleasure refer to one of the judge to be consider  and determine at his chamber in the vacation Mr justice who afterward make a  order to discharge defendant on enter a common appearance will for defendant  prime for plaintiff
BARNSONE against gale pasch banc sum p arrest of judgement in trespass a  action of trespass be bring for chase of the plaintiff hog the defendant by  way of justification plead a special plea videlicet that he do hunt they with  a dog by the command of his master because the plaintiff do put they into his  master ground to eat the acorn there the plaintiff reply that he have common  there upon this a issue be join and a verdict find for the plaintiff the  defendant move in arrest of judgement upon this exception that the plaintiff  in his replication have not answer the bar for he prescribe only for common of  pasture and pannage be no pasture and so he have no right to the acorn but  roll chief justice say if they have cause to eat the grass they may also eat  the acorn there for they may be on the ground and therefore it be a good  justification and therefore let the plaintiff have judgement except cause be  show to the contrary
BARNSY v powell Dec good sequester be insufficient to answer a but decree the  sergeant at arm revive the sergeant at arm have go after the defendant and on  his return a sequestration issue for not perform the decree the defendant be a  barrister and constant go the circuit and the effect sequester be insufficient  to satisfy the decree the sergeant at arm be revive this be oppose as a double  execution but after solemn argument allow the commitment be to answer the  contempt the sequestration ad to give satisfaction
BARNSY v powell Dec Lord Hardwicke c atk S c by the rule of the court the  plaintiff be first entitle to sue out a commission to examine witness and if  the defendant have a opportunity to examine his witness also and do not he be  not entitle to a new commission but if the plaintiff neglect to sue out a  commission the defendant may and so it be lie down by the Lord chancellor see  miny v raw
BARNWEL and PELSIES case a parson do covenant and grant by deed with one of  his parishioner that in consideration of six pound thirteen shilling and  Godbolt four penny per annum he pay unto he that the say parishioner shall be  discharge of all tithe upon condition to he void upon default of payment  afterward the parson against his grant do sue the parishioner in the spiritual  court for tithe in kind and it be move for a prohibition but the court will  not grant it because that the original videlicet the tithe do belong to  spiritual jurisdiction but it be say that the parishioner may have a action of  covenant against the parson upon the deed in the temporal court
Barnwell against grant hill bane sup enter Trin rot error to reverse a  judgement where some be find guilty and other acquit abatement error the court  be move for their opinion in this cause whether the writ of error do lie or  not it be say that a writ of error be not like another writ for another writ  may be abate for one person and stand good to another but if the writ of error  will not lie it be abate in all hacker and Wotton pasch car rot and roll chief  justice ask the counsel what he can say to the book of Edward and Edward privy  in record may join in a writ of error so be it here and a inconvenience may  come to all the party by this judgement although but some of the party against  who the action be commence be find guilty and other be acquit and therefore  they may all well join in the writ and therefore let the judgement be reverse  if cause be not show Wednesday next to the contrary
baron and feme be seize of a copyhold to they and the heir of the baron he  surrender it to the use of his will and then devise it to the heir of the body  of the feme if they attain the age of fourteen and die without issue and then  she marry a second husband and have issue that attain the age of fourteen and  then she die and whether this be a good devise by reason of the double  contingency scilicet the have heir of her body and that such heir shall live  till fourteen be doubt but it be admit that if the devise be good it must be  by way of executory devise which be Allowable when to take effect within the  compass of a life but not after a die without issue for that tend to a  perpetuity and it can take effect by way of remainder for it be a new devise  to take effect after her death and be not as a remainder join to her estate  but the court be divide upon the point of the contingency it be agree to be  adjourn into the exchequer Chamber and the reporter suppose the party agree  afterward for he hear no more of it snow and cutler lev
baron and feme Jointenants for their life baron sovus the land and die before  severance and the question be whether the wife or executor of the husband  shall have the corn and the court propose that each shall take a moiety which  be agree to Rowneys case vern
baron and feme OBRYAN and ram pasch W m Com SC Mod Carth the whole record of  this case be in Mod c where there be also argument pro and con error out of  Ireland where there be a judgement against a feme sole who marry a to know  facias issue against the husband and wife and judgement against they on two  nichils a year and day expire before any execution execute the wife die a to  know facias be award against the husband alone and judgement thereupon against  he and execution award the question be if the husband be Chargeable judgement  be affirm
baron in right of his wife be seize in fee of a share of the NewRiver water  they both mortgage the share by lease for year by deed without fine reserve a  pepper corn rend the baron die upon which the feme receive the profit and pay  the interest the mortgagee bring his bill to foreclose the wife insist that  this lease be not actual void but only voidable by the feme after the baron  death and that her payment of the interest when discovert affirm the lease or  that if the mortgage be not affirm yet a decree of foreclosure will better the  legal Title of the mortgagee and not prejudice the feme but the master of the  roll equity case abridge hold that this be the inheritance of the feme there  ought to have be a fine a that if there have be a rend reserve the acceptance  of it by the wife when discovert will have affirm the lease but here be no  acceptance and the Le see be of a incorporeal thing out of which rend can not  well be reserve wherefore the lease expire by the husband be death the  mortgage be also thereby determine and nothing remain to foreclose and though  the court will not narrow look into the Title yet all this be admit on both  side and appear upon the open his honour dismiss the bill but without cost  easter Drybutter and Bartholemew will Rep a vide p can
baron seize in right of his wife in fee of a share of the new river water the  wife can be bar sans fine per his honour east Drybutter and Bartholomew will  Rep a fine may be and usual be levy of new river share by the description of  so much land water overwhelmed per his honour ibidem and wherever a fine and  recovery be necessary for cut off the entail and remainder of such share in  regard the new river run through three county videlicet Hertford Middlesex and  London there must be three several fine and recovery pass as to any of these  share videlicet a fine and recovery in each county ibidem in a note by the  editor
barras v baste the plaintiff unknown cost award against he that serve the  Subpna the defendant get S cost for want of a bill and make oath they know not  anysuch man as the plaintiff be and that the Subpna be serve on they by one  Michael barrow therefore order upon the motion of Cordell the defendant  attorney that a Subpna be award against the say Michael barrow either to pay  the cost or to direct the defendant to the knowledge of the pretend plaintiff  Barras plaintiff baste and other defendant year Elizabeth
barrel versus Fletcher pasch James the plaintiff bring a action of debt upon a  obligation of five hundred pound with a condition to stand to the award of I S  and I d so that c the defendant plead that the arbitrator make no award the  plaintiff reply and show the award make verbatim and conclude that they have  make a award and do not assign any breach the defendant rejoin that the award  plead be not the deed of the arbitrator and issue be join upon that there be a  verdict for the plaintiff and Yelverton move in arrest of judgement because  the plaintiff in his replication have not assign any breach of the award and  so have show no cause of action for the replication be not for any debt  Brownlow goldsborough er p but be guide by the condition and be for the  performance of a collateral thing to wit of a award and although the defendant  have not answer any thing to the breach if it have be assign yet the court  ought to be satisfy that the plaintiff have good cause of action to recover  otherwise they shall not give judgement and although a verdict be give for the  plaintiff yet this imperfection in the replication be matter of substance and  be not help by the statute by the opinion of the whole court except justice  William rend reserve at Michaelmas or within ten day after due at Michaelmas
barret against Milward error in to know facias on recognizance against bail in  the exchequer Herne one plead prosecution and that the judgement be not yet  affirm the plaintiff protestand he do not prosecute with effect for plea he  say judgement be affirm in the exchequer Chamber at Westminster by the justice  of c b and baron of the degree of the coif prout to stand open per record to  which the defendant demurrer because it be not set forth before who it be  affirm nor what number be there which must appear to be within Elizabeth there  be a special cause show that judgement be not pray in the to know facias de  debt is owed financial loss winnington pro plaintiff the writ of error express  they particular but not the to know facias nor shall it be intend the judge  have proceed contra to the statute as to the second exception when no issue be  join but a hoc a preparation verify there the plaintiff pray judgement de debt  is owed financial loss but not where there be a issue as here on affirmance of  the judgement or not which difference the court and clerk agree and per curian  judgement be not affirm unless there be that number and the defendant may say  there be not so many of the coif to avoid it printer Twisden who hold it like  submission to judge of b r it must be by all and particular allege but  judgement pro plaintiff nisi
barret against tailor assumpsit in consideration the plaintiff at the  defendant request will depasture head of fat cattle so long as they please the  defendant will pay it be move in arrest of judgement that the depasture be of  cattle general three Keble day which per curian after verdict be sufficient  and it be at the will of either and judgement pro plaintiff
barret against the hundred OF stoke Friday Nov fresh suit modern pl in action  sur statute of Winton of hue and cry the plaintiff except against witness of  the defendant that they be inhabitant in the hundred who may be take in  execution albeit they pay no scot and lot and they be Chargeable to watch and  ware so the robbery be in their default and Twisden conceive they ought not to  be swear but raynsford and Moreton contra whereupon Twisden go into c b to  know their opinion and per wile and terell they ought not to be swear be able  of body and no almspeople nor servant for they may be contributory after and  they be set aside it be agree per curian that if the party be set upon by  daylight while party may know and discern each other albeit they continue rob  within night it be within the statute and verdict pro plaintiff livre damage
barret against Trotman general nontenure not pleadable in a deci fac contra if  special ante Mod Bac ab in a to know facias on a judgement in debt I S be  return tertenant hunt his attorney and plead nontenure the plaintiff demurrer  general and bad judgement because a general nontenure be no plea in this  action though a special nontenure be as that he have only a term of year also  here be no Christian name for the attorney
barrett car banc Reg arrest of judgement in trespass a action of trespass be  bring for dig in his land and carry away a certain number of load of earth and  a verdict be for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that the  declaration be incertain for the trespass be lie to be do in land lie in  diverse town it be not show what kind of soil the earth be that be carry away  but both the exception be overrule and judgement rule to be enter nisi causan  c
Barrington against Venables bail Pococke bail for the defendant pray to be  discharge on a letter of the plaintiff to the defendant that he shall manage  his business with his best advantage with his bail who resolve to take he  which the court conceive a knavish practice to take the bail without the  principal yet will not discharge the bail but the court allow he to plead to a  to know facias and to remove the record after nul tiel record plead and leave  he to bring his action for the fraudulent write the letter
Barrington against Venables privilege h after imparlance plead that he be one  of the king privy Chamber and by the law and custom of the realm ought not to  be sue in any court of England without his consent but only by licence of the  Lord chamberlain first have which be intend to the jurisdiction of the court  but the court conceive it without colour nought and inquire the counsel that  set his hand to the plea to have punish he the plea be go for sale and make  practice of defending vim in an unjust manner and do not conclude demand  judgement si curian understand lightarmed footsoldier which be also nought
Barrington boucher Dism Br Tyths Weston pray a prohibition suggest a discharge  by the Cestertian order in suit for tiths although he have the will in his own  hand discharge which per curian be traversable the patentee be only discharge  while the land be in his own hand as when in the hand of the abbot at the  dissolution not their lessee and so nigh against Thomas pl Com by Windham  although debit dainties to be per mayor rhythm but the court also conceive  there ought to be a positive averment that these land be in the abbot hand at  the time of the dissolution and now in his own else will grant no prohibition  and its not sufficient to say the will be unless of which they be parcel
barrington case one Barrington be sue in the king bench plead his privilege as  one of the auditor of the exchequer and allege in his plea that all men c omit  who ought not to be sue elsewhere than in the court of exchequer and Crompton  and levingston case be cite as a case in point in the court in where the  defendant insist upon his privilege in chancery as a clerk there and be  overrule because though all men can not be sue elsewhere yet some may beside  he do not here aver his plea as he ought to have do because it be issuable  whether or no he be the same person who be auditor there and to this opinion  the court seem to incline but the plaintiff counsel say that the precedent in  the exchequer be without any such averment and they make a difference betwixt  the officer or clerk of court who be upon record there and their servant who  be not et adjornatur
Barrington v Searle equity case abridge n er where a bind be give and no  interest appear to have be pay for twenty year thereon it be presumptive  evidence that the bind have be satisfy unless something appear to answer the  length of time b per Lord Chan Talbot who say this be the rule mich Humphreys  and Humphreys will Rep b the produce a receipt for interest within twenty year  endorse on the bind by the obligee though the time when such receipt be write  and sign do not appear otherwise than by the endorsement itself have be hold  sufficient to take off the presumption of payment ibidem in a note by the  editor who cite the case of the Lord Barrington v Searle in parliament Feb  upon a Writ of error from the exchequer Chamber equity case abridge c in what  case PAROL or collateral evidence shall be admit evidence admit that may have  be produce before at law bunb parole proof admit to prove the intent of a note  in write ibidem but parole evidence not admit to contradict the plain word of  a will Str
Barrington versus Venables privilege keb debt upon a obligation of after  imparlance the defendant plead to the jurisdiction that none of the privy  Chamber ought to be sue in any other court at the suit of any person without  special licence of the Lord chamberlain of the household for the time be and  that he be one of the privy Chamber the plaintiff demurrer and judgement be  that he shall answer over for such plea can be plead after imparlance and the  plea it self be ill and the court seem to be offend with the say plea
barrow against Hewit ante error Br buck move for judgement because the  mittimus to the justice certify by the chief justice as Harrison against  Morpeth c b be well enough as in that case to the justice of Ely and so Jones  against William a record betwixt noble return inter armigeros be well enough  and Edward cap call he the high justice and Elizabeth call this justicer and  have the certificate be by his proper name Cr bethels case it have be well  enough Cr Lister against ravenscroft praeecipe guardianis the writ of view be  guardiano yet well and Hub Hub come not to this case be direct to the justice  of peace certificate by clerk of the roll Trin car and the case of a writ  direct to the commissioner of the sewer certify by their clerk and rule Keble  good and so here by Twisden curian for the court will not presume any other  judgement for the plaintiff nisi
barrow against Hewit ante Siderf error Br variance the general direction be  justiciario   Entr b the mittimus to remove a record out of Chester be direct  justiciario of Chester who return a record before the Ch justice which by buck  be well enough Hub Keble er p h cap because but one justice there I Cr have  the writ be to I Bradshaw it have be well enough and the word justice but  surplusage and so pray judgement for the plaintiff in the writ of error post  Adjornatur
barrow against Hewit trover in a action of trover for a cow after argument  miller for the defendant pray the privilege of a parliament man which the  court will not allow on suggestion without a writ
barrow against kew c hill pound car rot church Siderf pl in trespass for break  a seat wherein as belong to his house the plaintiff time out of c use to sit  be in another parish the defendant justify that he have a house in the parish  and by reason thereof use to repair and therefore sit therein as be lawful c  and traverse the prescription of the plaintiff sander move in arrest of  judgement because that for his house in one parish be can have a seat in  another parish by prescription send non allocatur this seat be in the isle and  issue take on the prescription which bath wave the other matter but the court  conceive a prescription for a seat by a inhabitant in another parish be ill  unless he prescribe for the isle or pro sedile or show that he use to repair  but after verdict these be intend and be necessary evidence and so it be  resolve in the case of Buxton against Bateman in chattel Br will which be  affirm by all the Keble er p judge on a writ of error bring in the exchequer  Chamber and judgement pro plaintiff nisi
BARROWCLOUGH against webster and smith in assault and battery easter geo both  defendant plead not guilty and defendant Webster by leave of the court plead  also son assault demesne verdict for plaintiff against both defendant on the  not guilty and for defendant Webster on the son assault damage as to smith S  two certificate be sign on the record of nisi prius by the Lord chief baron  who try the cause one that the assault and barn battery be sufficient prove  the other that there be a probable cause for make Webster a defendant Webster  move for cost on stat Ann which do not extend to this case nor stat will as  hold by the court cost deny prime for Webster
barry vers barry practice mich Geo ivory and machen the same be hold again l  raym S c the principal die after the return of a capias ad to give  satisfaction and before take out a to know facias against the bail and the  court refuse to stay proceed against they for in strictness of law the bail be  bind from the return of non be inventus  and it be but ex agreeableness that a  surrender after be accept which time they take at their peril roll Abr pl ante  strange report er p
bartholomew and c against Goulding mich geo plaintiff have appear for  defendant pursuant to the late Act of parliament leave a declaration in the  office in easter term and in Trinity term give notice thereof to defendant and  for want of a plea sign judgement defendant apply to the law be since alter by  Act of parliament barn er p the court within Trinity term to set aside the  judgement the nature of the action be omit in the notice and on hear counsel  on both side the judgement be set aside in Michaelmas term follow plaintiff  give new notice of the declaration and sign a second judgement the defendant  apply again to the court to set that judgement aside insist that the  declaration be well deliver from the time of serve the second notice only and  that the writ be returnable in easter term last the declaration be deliver too  late and the plaintiff must begin again and the court be of that opinion and  order the second judgement to be set aside
bartholomew versus golding mich geo two prac ring barn S c when judgement be  set aside for irregularity the plaintiff must deliver another declaration  BORRET a motion to set aside judgement it appear that a judgement have be set  aside in the same cause this term for irregularity in the notice and upon that  the plaintiff give fresh notice without deliver a new declaration imagine the  first declaration will stand good but the court set aside this judgement also  for the plaintiff shall have file another declaration accord to the second  notice
bartlet against bartlet Trin James rot Tr James rot Richard Bartlet bring a  action upon the case against Thomas Bartlet and he declare upon a account and  show that the defendant be find in arrearage in which he promise to pay when  he shall be request and now the plaintiff have not lie any day or place of  request in his declaration and Ashley move in arrest of judgement that the  declaration be not good for the request be also parcel of the promise but  Hobert chief justice say that when a man bring a action upon the case for a  thing which be original a debt the plaintiff need not lie any time or place of  the request but when the action be bring for a collateral thing there he ought  to lie a day and place of the request and so it be adjudge accord in the same  case
bartlet against ramsden Wednesday Oct devise on issue out of the chancery to  try whether the plaintiff be entitle by two write or any other purport a will  of I S and the evidence be of a feoff Keble er p to the use of such person as  I S shall name and appoint by his last will in which case the devisees be in  by the feoff and not by the will but per curian that be only Keble fiction law  but they be not in without the will and therefore that be the principal part  of the title and such proof good enough and pursuant to the issue and verdict  for the plaintiff accord
bartlet versus vinor mich W m Carthew action of the case on assumpsit c in  which the plaintiff declare that the defendant in consideration that he the  plaintiff will procure to be lend to another in the name of the defendant c he  the defendant promise to pay to the plaintiff and the plaintiff aver that he  procure the say sum to be lend by W p in his name by agreement of the  defendant and now this action be bring for the on non assumpsit plead the  plaintiff have a verdict and it be move in arrest of judgement that the  consideration of this promise be usurious and unlawful or at least that it be  brocage and so prohibit by the last statute against usury but the court  resolve that this be not usurious or brocage within the intent of the statute  for here neither the borrower nor the lender be to pay the prize but a three  person and by holt c j if a owe b who demand his iiaoney and a acquaint he  that he have not the money ready but be Willing to pay it if b can procure the  ing a press same to be lend by any other person and thereupon b have holt KB a  present occasion for his money contract with c that if he will lend a lie will  give he on which c lend the money and thus the debt be pay to b this be a good  and lawful contract between these two for b have benefit by it judgement be  give for the plaintiff
bartlett against spooner easter geo this be a action of trespass to which  defendant by leave of the court have plead three plead videlicet not guilty  and two several justification on the trial defendant prove his second plea to  the satisfaction of the court and obtain barn a verdict on the first and  second issue but as to the three issue no proof be go into nor any verdict  find relate to it Belfield for plaintiff object that the verdict be incomplete  imperfect and uncertain nothing be find as to a material fact put in issue and  therefore as to the three issue a venire facias de to make new ought barn er p  to be award on show cause prime for defendant observe that by the first plea  not guilty the whole be put in issue that by the second plea the whole  trespass be cover and therefore the verdict be complete it be find thereby  that plaintiff have no cause of action and the judge who try the cause do not  think it needful to go far as plaintiff have no cause of action he can have no  damage contingent damage in case of issue and demurrer and issue try before  argument be not necessary to be find at the trial on plaintiff verdict but may  be afterward supply if judgement for plaintiff on the demurrer per cur here be  enough find for that court to give judgement upon No venire facias de to make  new ought to issue it be not the business of defendant but of plaintiff to  have the three issue determine if he imagine that thereby he may be entitle to  cost or any other advantage the rule discharge N B plaintiff give no evidence  on the not guilty
bartlett against the attorneygeneral and other a bind give as security for a  collector of the custom do not extend to a subsequent duty upon coal where the  collector have a new deputation and give security for the duty upon coal and  so it be hold where no security be give upon the second deputation clarke in  be make collector of the custom in the port of Boston Bartlett and other be  security for he in W the duty be grant upon coal c which by the statute be to  be under the management of the commissioner of the custom and several clause  for that purpose in the act the commissioner give clarke a deputation for that  purpose and take security afterward clarke die the custom be pay but on this  new coal duty one thousand pound remain unpay upon which the bind be put in  suit against Bartlett the widow and executrix of Bartlett the security and she  bring her bill and the question be whether the bind in which Bartlett become  security extend to this future duty on coal after adjournment the baron  deliver their opinion seriatim and unanimous hold that the say bind do not  extend to the future Parker duty on coal and that the plaintiff ought to be  relieve and accord order a perpetual stay of process upon the say bind
barton against bains Darnall move to make a rule absolute for a attachment  against one Bridgwater a attorney for not deliver to his client indenture of a  fine c pursuant to Mr justice fortescue order which have be make a rule of  court per cur No demand of the write appear since the judge order make a rule  of court and therefore take a rule that a demand of the write leave at the  chamber of Bridgwater who conceal himself shall be a good demand
barton against the rev Mr ashton a vide above p post p a arch court byday  after Trinity term article admit against a parish clerk he appeal to the court  of arch and apply to the court of king bench for a mandamus not competent to  he to proceed in both court assign to declare which he elect consider Welsh v  bishop of Lincoln lr Adm Ec upon a motion dr Simpson for Ashton the Rev Mr  Ashton parson of Lowth in Lincolnshire turn out his parish clerk Ralph Barton  and appoint another to officiate and then article against Barton in the  consistory of Lincoln for misbehaviour in his office of parish clerk and pray  that his licence may be revoke that June citation return that June appearance  for Barton who pray he may not be disturb lee pen the suit but that he may  quiet possess the office till sentence shall be give against he judge assign  to hear his pleasure thereon article admit Barton appeal from admission  thereof and from the judge assign to hear his pleasure on Barton prayer  article admit saint July from which c he immediate appeal that July he apply  to the king bench for a mandamus to lee er p restore he to his office we pray  he may be assign to make his option whether he will proceed in the king bench  on the mandamus or in this court on the appeal dr Paul for Barton Ashton be  minister of Lowth Barton be parish clerk there his offence be say that Ashton  be a great rogue a rule only for a mandamus have be grant the article be  afterward admit at ashton petition affidavit of John gentle gentle be read to  show that Barton be proceed in the king bench and have obtain a rule to show  cause why a mandamus shall not go judgment sir george lee I be of opinion  Barton ought not to proceed in both court and assign he to declare the first  day of next Hilary term whether he will proceed in the king bench on the  mandamus or in this court on the appeal
barton and Edmonds case a infant and another be bind in a bind for the debt of  the infant the infant at his full age do assume to save the other man harmless  against the say bind afterward the infant die it be resolve by the whole court  that upon this assumpsit a action upon the care will lie against the executor  of the infant but if a feme cov ere it and another at her request have be bind  in such a bind and after the death of her husband she have assume to have save  the other harmless against such bind such assumpsit shall not have bind the  wife trinit Elizabeth in the common plead
barton and hamshire ejectment in ejectment of a message and forty acre of  pasture after verdict Barwell except in arrest of judgement that a ejectment  lie not of common no more than of a piscary Cr pl but by Twisden curian though  ejectment lie not of that alone yet be after verdict it shall be intend  appurtenant and so well enough and judgement for the plaintiff nisi
barton and WOLLIFORD see Pandorf v Hamilton Q b d App Cas bill of lade or  policy of insurance case on a bill of lade on condition that the defendant  shall deliver here so much gold the peril of the sea except the defendant  plead piracy to which the plaintiff demurrer Thompson pro Quer the danger of  the sea be intend only of the act of God not of man for robbery be no excuse  to a master of a ship any more than to a common carrier vide the case of mors  and sluice in this court accord I Mod lev c Molloy de jure maritimo Comberbach  full contra that the case of mors cite before be within the body of the county  and it be there agree by hale that if it have be by enemy it will be otherwise  curian there be no difference as to charge a sheriff with a escape between the  break of the prison by rebel and by common enemy so in case of a robbery of a  carrier c so here piracy be one of the danger of the sea judgement pro to ward  off mich James case by a termor for stop his way and he prescribe to have such  way time out of mind c and it be move in arrest of judgement that a termor can  t prescribe c cur the say he be possess of the land be sufficient and the  prescription but surplusage and help d by verdict and so it be moody and saint  John S case judgement pro quer
barton tuff against HAPPERSBURGH a poor woman after the death of her husband  remove from Barton tuff the place of the settlement of the husband to a  copyhold estate of her own at Happersburgh and take with her her daughter of  thirteen year of age and the question on a order special state be whether the  daughter by this derive a new settlement under her mother it be resolve by the  court that there be not any difference between a settlement derive from the  father or mother but wherever a child will have gain a settlement under the  father if he have be live such child will do the same under the mother and the  court quash the order of removal to the settlement of the father and that of  the session confirm the same session case trinity thirteenth OF george the  second
barton versus bartlet Trin W case W four person be arrest upon one writ and  put in bail several one of they nonprossed the plaintiff for want of a  declaration holt CJ till they be sever d by the declaration the writ shall be  intend joint and the nonpros before the declaration must be upon the writ  which be joint and therefore one nonpros will do for all notwithstanding the  several bail holt KB JOINTENANTS and tenant in common
bartram plaintiff DANNETT defendant a attachment after a decree for dismission  be in nature of a execution at law and a general pardon may pardon the  contempt but not the debt the defendant have obtain a dismission of the  plaintiff bill with cost prosecute the plaintiff to a Commission of rebellion  for those cost be pound and in Hillary term charge he therewith in custody  where he remain a prisoner likewise at other man suit till he be discharge by  the Act of general pardon since which Act he be not prosecute by the defendant  nor any mean use to keep he in prison but be examine upon interrogatory as to  his contempt in not pay the cost he plead the say Act of indemnity make year  car and the plea be allow it be also allege that the plaintiff be irregular  prosecute and imprison on the contempt and on the that of February last it be  order that the master shall tax the plaintiff his cost the defendant find  himself aggrieve with that order now move by his counsel to have it discharge  and it appear that the say plea be hear before the defendant have any notice  that the plaintiff appear to be examine and his report tempt finch counsel far  insist that a attachment after a decree for dismission be in nature of a  execution and that though the Act may pardon the contempt or disability yet it  do not pardon the debt the court be off at opinion discharge the order
bartram plaintiff Dennett defendant plea of general pardon allow interrogatory  be exhibit against the plaintiff to be examine as to a contempt of the court  in not pay cost to the defendant which he be order to pay he plead the general  pardon make year car and the court allow the plea with cost c
BARTROP and gwillim Tuesday may abatement sergeant Baldwin pray stay of  judgement on death of the defendant after verdict and before the day in bank  which per curian on sir John Dreydons case be a actual abatement of the writ  and the statute car be expire in April last and no error lie in the exchequer  Chamber for this error in fact and on affidavit of the death in replevin the  judgement be stay nisi contra on release c Keble er p
BARTWRIGHTS case Bartwright bring a action of debt upon a bind against Harris  the condition be that if the defendant do acquit discharge and save harmless  the plaintiff against a obligation in which he and the defendant be bind to I  S in that then the obligation shall be void the defendant say that Bartwright  be sue on this obligation by I S and upon default l S have judgement to  recover and that the defendant before execution do deliver to the plaintiff  the and hereupon the plaintiff demurrer Humbert it be no plea for he confess  that the plaintiff be not yet take in execution yet inasmuch as he may be take  therefore his body good and land be liable to the execution and he have not  acquit nor save he harmless against the bind of I S vide dyer and the  plaintiff have judgement c Owen mich and Elizabeth in b r rot
BARTY v shaw suit for pasture or common dismiss the matter of the bill be for  pasture or common claim in the fen of Gosberton and because the matter be more  meet to be decide by the commonlaw therefore dismiss Barte plaintiff shaw  defendant year Elizabeth
Barwick versus foster mich James action of debt bring for rend the cause be  thus the plaintiff lease certain land to the defendant at mich James for five  year yield and pay rend at our lady day and mich yearly or within ten day  after and for rend behind at the last mich the plaintiff declare as for rend  due at the Feast of saint Michael and prima fancy it seem to the whole court  but crook that the action will not lie but that Brownlow goldsborough the rend  for the last quarter be go for it be not due at Michaelmas as the plaintiff  have declare for his own show it be Payable and reserve at Michaelmas or  within ten day after and although the lessee may pay it at Michaelmas day yet  it be not any debt which lie in demand by any action until the ten day be pass  and the reservation be the lessors act it shall be take most strong against  himself and although the end of the term be at Michaelmas before the ten day  until which time the rend be not due and because at that time the term be end  the lessor shall lose his rend as if a lessor die before Michaelmas day the  executor shall not have the rend but the heir by dissent as incident to the  reversion and if the lessee shall pay the rend to the lessor at Michaelmas day  and the lessor shall die before the ten day his heir be a ware to the king the  king shall have it again for of right it ought not to be pay until the ten day  accord to the e but this case be move again in Hillary term Fleming fennor and  Yelverton change their opinion and hold that the lessor shall have the rend  for it be reserve yearly and the ten day shall be expound to give liberty to  the lessor within the term for his ease to protract the payment but because  the ten day after the last Michaelmas be out of the term rather than the  lessor shall lose his rend yearly the law reject the last ten day a judgement  reverse by writ of error notwithstanding a verdict and the statute of  Elizabeth
base and bellamount pasch W case W holt CJ if the king grant a tract of land  in the plantation abroad to a man with a legislative power which land the  grantee passes over to another the legislative power shall not pass as a  privilege annex to the land but that remain with the person of the grantor see  estate holt KB guardian
baskervile plaintiff against HENSKAM all defendant in a writ of error in a  writ of error to reverse a judgement give for three the error assign that one  of they be dead tempore judgment return the other answer that he be in full  life tempore judgment scilicet at such a day S Augusti the whole court clear  of opinion that this scilicet be idle and the other issue good that he be in  full life the sole and material issue here be the time of the judgement  William justice there be no book wherein mention be Bulstrode make of such a  issue join upon a scilicet and so by the rule of the court the scilicet here  be void and the other issue so stand be only whether the party be live at the  time of the judgement give or not
baskervill versus brock difference between bail in the king bench and the  common plea and how a bill shall relate a man become bail for another upon a  latitat in the king bench and before judgement the bail let his land for  valuable consideration and afterward judgement be give for the plaintiff and  now it be debate whether the land lease shall be liable to the bailment and it  be say by Glanville of council with the lessee that it ought not to be liable  and he put a difference between a bailment in this court and a bailment in the  common plea for there the suit come by original and the certainty of the debt  or demand appear in the declaration and therefore then it be certain know from  the beginning of the bailment for what the bail shall be bind but in this  court upon the latitat there be not any certainty until judgement give before  which the land be not bind and now it be in another man band and therefore not  liable and he put hoe case   lib where it be resolve that where the plaintiff  release to the bail of the defendant upon a suit in the king bench before  judgement all action duty and demand that this release shall not bar the  plaintiff for there be not any certain duty by the bail before judgement and  therefore Popham er p it can be a release and he cite the case of e upon a  account and say that it be like to a second judgement in that which reduce all  to a certainty and therefore c but it be say by Montague and crook that the  lessee shall be bind for otherwise many bailments and judgement shall be  defeat which will bring a great inconvenience and Montague say that it be like  to the ease of a bargain and sale of land which after it be enrol within six  month shall relate to the beginning of the bargain so upon the judgement give  relation be make from the time of the bailment but Haughton be contra  therefore curian advisare vult the same term in the same court
basket against lord mordant a man have several commons in one place one  appurtenant to one message the other to another message can make a joint  prescription for both if a lessor grant a moiety of the reversion to a and the  other moiety to b c the lessee attorns accord and then a and b grant to I S c  the lessee commit waste I S shall not have several but one action of waste  although he have the reversion by several grant and title by mead Trin Eliz  note upon evidence to a jury of the county of Dorset in bane between basket  and the lord mordant it be hold by the court that if a man have common in a  down or waste for one hundred sheep as appurtenant to a house and certain acre  of land meadow and pasture and he purchase another message with certain land  which also have common in the same down or waste for other hundred sheep as  appurtenant thereto by prescription if he make title in plead by prescription  in the entire for common appurtenant to both house and land together for two  hundred sheep he have fail in his prescription for he ought to make two  several title and prescription for the two hundred sheep and not to join both  in one for they be two distinct commons dyer a er p
basket and Rayner a prisoner in the king b at the suit of the king upon a  conviction for a libel may be charge with civil process and leave will be  grant of course either by motion in court or a judge at his chamber plaintiff  who be the king printer and have the sole right of print bible have obtain a  injunction in chancery to restrain the defendant from print any upon which  injunction the defendant be in contempt and be likewise a prisoner in the king  bench prison at the king suit upon a conviction for print and publish a libel  Pratt in behalf of the plaintiff move for liberty to charge he with a  attachment and have give notice to the attorneygeneral he come into court and  consent Lord Hardwicke c j to charge a person who be in custody here upon a  criminal prosecution with civil process be a motion of course and a judge may  grant it at his chamber be it so but it can be do without leave t raym side SC  I lev side SC I lev salk r t geo a
BASPOLE against long a copyhold be surrender to the use of a for life the  remainder to b in fee into the hand of customary tenant in the presence of two  other and that the custom of that manor be that if at the next court after  such a surrender it be to be surrender proclamation be to be make that if any  claim c to be admit that he shall come and he shall be hear and if none come  then two proclamation be to be make and if none come before the three  proclamation make and end that then it shall be a bar to he and his heir to  who use such a surrender be make and that in our case a do not come before the  three proclamation c whereupon the lord grant it to another and it be hold by  the court that in our case he in the remainder be not bar after the death of a  for b in the remainder can come and claim to be admit present but the lord  shall hold it during the life of a and a case be vouch and agree t Elizabeth  rot rastall against lane a custom be that waste shall be a forfeiture of the  copyhold and there adjudge that waste by the lessee for life shall not forfeit  the remainder in fec but during the life of the lessee for life only also a  custom shall be take strict and judgement be give accord note it be adjudge p  James c b Whitton against savage that such a customer ut above shall not bind  he that be overseas when such a surrender be make or when the copyhold descend
bass vers bradford see Str but see also Str I burr Bl Cowp in ejectment the  demise in the declaration against the casual ejector and afterward deliver to  the tenant in possession be lie of the second of June last to commence from  ladyday before and after the tenant in possession have enter into the  commonrule in the declaration in the issue deliver to the defendant the demise  be lie to be of the second of August last the title of the lessor of the  plaintiff be upon a breach of a condition for nonpayment of rend due midsummer  last and sergeant banns move for the defendant that the issue may be make  accord to Lord Raymond er p the declaration deliver to the tenant in  possession because the plaintiff ought not to recover upon a title accrue  subsequent to the delivery of the first declaration Mr fazakerley for the  plaintiff insist that the first declaration be only in nature of a notice and  therefore the second declaration may vary from the first as to the demise but  per totan curian by the course of this court there can be no alteration in the  declaration in the issue from the first declaration deliver only in the  defendant name and a rule be make that the issue shall be make accord to the  declaration deliver against the casual ejector
bass vers firmen upon a bind in which a foreigner bind himself by his  description as a foreigner in so much of money prediction with a condition for  the payment of foreign money he be only bind in foreign money the proceed in a  action be not to be stay because the plaintiff have not pay the cost of a  former action for the Lord Raymond er p same cause between himself and the  defendant unless the merit be decide in such former action in debt upon a bind  make in this manner noverint whole world per praesentesme Firmain de Perth  amboy in province de west jersey tender et really to bind up to the plaintiff  in bequest monetea prediction c the plaintiff demand of the money of England  and upon non be factum plead at the trial before holt chief justice at  guildhall pasch will the plaintiff be nonsuit the chief justice hold that this  bind bind the defendant in the money of west jersey not of England the  condition of the bind be also for payment of of the say province and now the  plaintiff bring a new action upon this bind in the to hold off as of foreign  coin ad valor of so much of the money of England and this term sergeant hall  move that the plaintiff may not proceed before he have pay the cost of the  former nonsuit which be oppose by Raymond for the plaintiff and deny by the  court because the merit do not come in question in the trial upon which he be  nonsuit but he be nonsuit only upon the variance and the say rule be grantable  general only in ejectment
basset against shippon Siderf pl trespass Cr pl error Br in trespass for enter  his house foot ambulando continuando for two year alian irregular under which  he give evidence that the defendant come as suitor to his daughter and defile  her which be the cause of great damage give for which cause winnington pray  new trial which the court deny but conceive this may well be give in evidence  without say quod insultum fecit super son c so of the wife but this be the  better way judgement for the plaintiff in error Br error ex motion brewer to  quash a writ of error bring on the crown side de think over quod in person  thou on judgement give in b r the court conceive that it well lie as well on  error in law as in fact but on the plea side only in fact and the other be  remove into the house of lord but never on the crown side say adjornatur to  search precedent Keble er p
basset against williams error error of judgement in quare hinder be assign by  Barwell in want of title be by lease for year to commence after all former  advowson videlicet grant thereof Tr Ph mark be execute or when the avoidances  before grant be satisfy which be ill and uncertain as rector of Chedingtons  case or as lease for year habendum to executor for so many year as shall be  undetermined at death of lessee but by Allen for the plaintiff the limitation  be void there be no avoidances grant and so the lease shall begin present  which the court grant and it may be aver that there be none and need not be  plead as a lease to begin present judgement affirm Keble er p
Basset case a tenant in tail remainder to b in fee levy a fine b die his heir  within age a die without issue Play have his action at any time either before  or within five year after he be of age tenant in tail remainder in fee to a  stranger the tenant in tail levy a fine with proclamation and he in remainder  die his heir within age S of the age of five year and then the tenant in tail  die without issue so that a title to a action of formation in the remainder  accrue to the infant who suffer five year more to pass after the title accrue  without bring his action of formedon yet he may have his action afterward  within age notwithstanding the word of the statute h c which save and reserve  the action or claim of the infant until his full age and then he shall have  five year c and this be agree by all the judge of both bench and master baker  and master hare in the petition of right of Basset which be in the nature of  the formedon in the remainder griffin the attorneygeneral be of a contrary  opinion also it be move whether in a formedon in the remainder the parole  demurrer for the nonage of the demandant where the tenant do not plead any  plea in bar or not for in the Nottingham eire e fit age the parole demurrer  dyer b er p because it be in the nature of a writ of right where a feesimple  be demand and as heir but e pl be contra more of this matter post fol pl
bassett against JEFLOCK and johnson in a ejection the jury give a special  verdict to this effect that queen Elizabeth be seize in fee in jure coronve of  the manor of Watton in the county of York and that king James the of Mars  James do grant the same to William brown and Robert knight and their heir who  the twenty seven of April James do bargain and sell the same to Michael  Feilding and his heir who enter and die seize and after who death the same  descend to basil Feilding as his brother who make a lease to the plaintiff  Bridgman it seem to I that the plaintiff have make a good title but it be  object that there be no good title for that it be not find that the queen die  seize or that the land descend to the king but it be answer that when the  queen be seize in fee in jure coronce that shall be intend to continue until  the contrary be show for when a estate of inheritance be once allege it shall  be intend still to continue till the contrary be show blow Com and and  afterward videlicet James judgement be give for the plaintiff without any  argument at the bench
bassett against lewis a lease to commence after the end of another where there  be no such lease SC I keb error of a judgement in a quare hinder in Wales  where the plaintiff be nonsuit the defendant make title to have a writ to the  bishop videlicet that the dean and chapter of saint d be seize and present I S  and grant the advowson for year to Richard William from the time that the  advowson then grant shall determine and it be assign for error that it be not  know when the advowson levinz er p grant do determine and therefore the  advowson grant to William for year be void for the incertainty levinz when it  shall commence whereto it be answer by alein that then the grant to William  shall commence immediate at the time of the grant to which the court agree and  affirm the judgement note the plaintiff in the quare hinder have aver that  there be not any grant in be at the time of the grant to William but the court  hold the grant to be good without the aid thereof
bastard administrator of bastard who be executor of bastard against JUTSHAM  easter geo this be a action of debt on bind defendant plead non be factum  whereupon issue be join and a verdict be find for plaintiff draper move in  arrest of judgement and object that the action will not lie for the  administrator of a executor there must be a administration de good testator  barn non administer by executor court grant a rule to stay the entry of  judgement upon the verdict till far order
bastard against Stukele No survivorship by the ecclesiastical law SC Sho pa  Jon Vid Jon lev Sho prohibition one devise good to a and b the executor assent  to the legacy and afterward a die and now the executor of a sue in the  spiritual court for a share there be no survivorship in such case by the law  ecclesiastical whereupon b sue a prohibition and declare and upon demurrer and  argument it be adjudge the prohibition shall stand for by the assent of the  executor the interest be vest in the legatee and become a chattel in they  governable by the rule of the commonlaw levinz er p
bastard and STEWKLY ante legacy master against the prohibition on demurrer  that this be a testamentary thing its of ecclesiastical cognizance and roll  they shall expound this legacy accord to their law attachment sur Prohib Br  and Yelverton and Cr and roll Mothams case and Bulster Barker and as to the  assent to the legacy this take not away the jurisdiction for though of thing  certain action may be at commonlaw yet as devise Br not for incertainty as  here for two part of four part of eight part as Cr wrights case the allegation  of a plea be nothing the substance of it be immaterial but on plead in bar as  simony c its otherwise   Entr Keble green and Burch   arch bishop of  canterburys case and so Sydown and Holmes and   Jeoffries case refusal of  immaterial plea be no cause of prohibition Polyxphen for the defendant roll  come not to this case that be because the court here can give no remedy for a  sum of money devise but this be devise of rest and residue to Alice and bevill  executor who by assent be tenant in common and have remedy against each other  at commonlaw as other tenant in common wherefore the legacy be hereby end and  after a assent there be no remedy in the spiritual court for good but only for  money wherefore on death of one the other can sue for that moety by survivor  Keble er p and by the demurrer on the prohibition its confess the plea be a  good bar by our law therefore on more pl Cr Bennet and Cr morris and Eaton he  pray a consultation per curian by the assent its alter from a legacy and one  can grant only her own moety but they be only jointtenants in interest still  yet whether they be so or not be tryable here and not in spiritual court  contra by Jones there be no remedy but in spiritual court for incertain part  but by Rainsford chief justice and wile trover lie on actual conversion of the  good by one et adjornatur
bastard and stuckely ante legacy prohibition recite great chart cap and that  the plaintiff have four child and a wife and that two of the child be executor  and devisees one of which die and the other marry the defendant and the legacy  be vest in the wife as survivor tenant in common the suit can be in the  spiritual court for a interest settle but at the commonlaw also here they can  be tenant in common because its not aver the debt be all pay but they be only  joint tenant and so if the spiritual court do not allow Keble a survivorship  as they never do this be ground of a prohibition so wherever way data the  administrator of the decease can sue in spiritual court as where a horse be  devise to b and the executor assent the legatee can sue in the spiritual court  and though he have no remedy at the commonlaw that be no reason to sue in the  spiritual court and on roll per curian stet prohibition nisi without aver debt  pay
bastard and STUCKLY ante legacy on demurrer to prohibition in suit for two  part of four devise to the defendant wife and her brother as executor whereby  the legatee be jointtenants of residuum will do you much good and so be no  remedy at commonlaw the plaintiff in the prohibition say he ought not to be  sue there because by the assent the chattle be vest and not thing testamentary  which Rainsford chief justice and wile agree but by Twisden and Jones these be  executory and not like particular legacy of horse c the spiritual court have  the jurisdiction of what be residuum will do you much good no prohibition  ought to go until they judge contrary to our law et adjornatur
bastard and Stukele ante legacy Polyxphen pray prohibition to the bishop of  Exeter in suit by the husband of the feme joint legatee of moiety of good and  joint executrix be dead and he administrator suggest that by her death all  survive to the plaintiff and this be triable at law but the jointure be sever  by the marriage the court conceive it do not survive but grant prohibition  nisi this be triable at law
bastard and Stukele Wednesday Feb legacy Polixphen pray a prohibition to  Exeter on devise of resid will do you much good to the two executor who both  prove the will and assent to the legacy and pay the debt and after one of they  die whereby at commonlaw the legacy survive which be suggest to be plead in  the spiritual court and refuse because by the spiritual court the legacy do  not survive but the moiety go to the administrator of the decease executor and  without affidavit prohibition award nisi Keble er p
bastard versus Hancock in c b to go into hill will adjudge mich will debt upon  the statute c for carry away his corn without set out the tithe comb debt upon  the statute of tithe in which the plaintiff declare for the Triple value set  forth that he be the lawful proprietor of the tithe arise within the parish of  Lanlivery in Cornwall and that the defendant be occupier of thirtyfive acre of  land within that parish and that they bad sow so many acre thereof with corn  and grain and have carry it away without set out the tithe Edward Carthew er p  upon nil debet plead the cause be try at Launceston assize before holt Ch  justice and the jury find that the defendant Hancock debet but quoad the other  defendant nil to withhold and now it be move in arrest of judgement for that  this verdict bad abate the action of the plaintiff because this a action of  debt ground on a contract which be entire and here the plaintiff have find his  action upon a contract make with three person and the jury find it quoad one  of they alone so that the plaintiff be mistake in his action for he ought to  have bring it against Hancock only and not against the two other defendant and  this be compare to the common case in action upon general contract and promise  but after great debate the court of c b in Michaelmasterm will unanimous  resolve that this action be find on a tort and not upon a contract for non  worthy of blame be a good plea to it and therefore one may be find guilty and  the other acquit as in other action upon tort the plaintiff have judgement
Bateman against ford a action of the case be bring against ford who have call  the plaintiff thief and that he have steal from he a yard of velvet and a yard  of damask the defendant say that he say that the plaintiff have take and bribe  from he as much money as he have for a yard of velvet and damask and justify  Hitcham say that the justification be not good for the word that he justffies  do not amount to so much as to affirm a felony in the plaintiff where the  plaintiff count that the defendant slander he of a felony Hutton say what  difference be there when you say that I have bribe your horse and when you say  that I have rob you of your horse henden one may take good and yet it be not  felony boundary pasc year car king come banc
Bateman against harvey a trader leaves off trade indebt if he may be a  bankrupt for those debt though not for those contract after vide I side vent  qure keb c vide ante vent side keb bullers n p cook b law ejectment and on a  special verdict the case be harvey be a merchant indebt to diverse person  leave off trade be so indebt in in he abscond and a commission be sue and he  adjudge a bankrupt in the debt not pay wherein he be indebt when he leave off  his trade and if he may be a bankrupt for those debt by abscond in be the  question it argue by Baldwin sergeant for the plaintiff and by brown for the  defendant who say that for call he bankrupt in when he do not gain his live by  buy and sell as the statute be he can have a action and cite I cro Colly  against main and cro Upwike against beks but the court incline that he shall  be a bankrupt as to those debt but not as to debt contract afterward but it  adjourn
Bateman and Botham against COLTLOW and street Saturday July day in trover hill  car sander except in arrest of judgement that the conversion be the d of  February send non allocatur for per curian the action commence from the bail  and so it have be resolve in ejectment and on the statute of limitation ex  motion latch style for albeit the relation of the term be to the first day yet  the bail be enter on a certain day and action be then say depend else several  judgement of the same term will clash and the latter be first which can be  decide but this way accord as bail be enter it be pro abbacis England shelfs  which be parcel of the freehold send non allocatur for be de good catallis it  be good it be peciis labor iron England dog which be better than pro  sustentaculis which may be wood it be de to make one mark England a sign of  the Crosskeys send per curian this be well enough and judgement pro plaintiff  nisi Keble er p
Bateman and foul how far a fact may be lie by a quod cum in a declaration in a  writ of error on a judgement in the common plea in a action of assault and  battery the error assign be that the fact be lie in the declaration by way of  recital only by a quod cum but sergeant chapel on the other side answer that  in the writ it be express set forth and in the common plea the writ be part of  the declaration and cite cro side Lutw the case of clerk and Lucas mich Geo  and the case of Roger and Gibs last easter term both determine in the common  plea adjudge in point however the court order this matter to stand over vide  post
Bateman and johnson injunction the plaintiff bring a bill charge that he be  possess of a message and of a piece of ground thereto adjoin enclose with a  wall the defendant proceed to pull down the wall and build upon the ground so  near the plaintiff house as to stop his light the defendant by his answer  insist the ground and wall be his and that the raise of his building can not  be a obstruction to the plaintiff light and now upon affidavit support the  allegation of the bill it be move for a injunction to stay the defendant  building c which my Lord chancellor deny for that this will be to determine  the right upon motion but his lordship order the defendant to receive a  declaration in trespass or ejectment as soon as the plaintiff shall think  proper that the matter may receive trial
Bateman and Laurence sheriff OF Middlesex versus swift parliament show slake  debt upon the statute of Elizabeth for poundage for execute a writ of  execution upon nil debet plead and a verdict for the plaintiff spark move in  Raymond sir t arrest of judgement that the statute be misrecited for the  plaintiff in their declaration say that the parliament be hold Elizabeth and  the book at large say it be hold the of Elizabeth but upon examination it  appear by the parliament roll that it be hold the of Elizabeth and the print  book be false therefore judgement be give for the plaintiff vide Anderson pl a  good case concern the commencement of this parliament Raymond sir t er p
Bates case hill will c b ld raym S c consider lemon v mark Salkeld ir r Lut a  tenant for life remainder for year remainder to a in tail a s wife shall be  endow aliter if the mesne remainder have be for life post I Leon e b e   light  a I Rep a tenant for life remainder to trustee for ninetynine year remainder  to tenant for life in tail tenant for life die his wife shall be endow  notwithstanding the intervene estate for that be for year only be not to be  regard at commonlaw the freeholder may destroy it by a feign recovery if the  remainder in tail have be in a stranger it will not have obstruct a action of  waste and as the case be the party die seize of a estatetail otherwise it will  have be if the mean intervene estate have be for life for that have obstruct  dower as well as waste ejectment
bath against batty slander roll she be a witch and bewitch all that deal with  her be not actionable and judgement stay after verdict ex motion Paulet the  word be too general and not apply to any particular fact or person
Bathurst case lev vent a action be bring against he as executor of a executor  of a executor against who the plaintiff have recover a judgement in debt and  it be suggest that he have waste the estate of the first testator and so by  the statute car his executor be liable in such manner as his testator will  have be if he have be live upon plene to manage plead the matter be find  special and that the executor which waste be indebt to the defendant who he  make his executor upon a simple contract and the question be whether the  defendant may retain for his debt against the debt ground upon the devastavit  and the court hold that he may for it shall not be adjudge a debt superior to  a simple contract Ventris boundary pasch e year car two in common banc
BATISFORD against yate hill bane sup pace rot error to reverse a judgement  give in a trover and conversion a writ of error be bring to reverse a  judgement give in a action of trover and conversion for these error it be say  of the juror in enter of their verdict to say pro to express grief and that in  the award of the venire itJ be therefore bring aceptum to be with a c and so  it be not certain whence the venire issue as it ought to be the rule be the  judgement shall be reverse if cause be not show to the contrary
BATMORE wife versus grave lev keb Mod trover for load of wood upon a special  verdict the case be this copyhold land be surrender to the use of I S for year  remainder to the brother of the plaintiff wife who die before the term expire  and so be not admit any otherwise than by the admission of the tenant for year  and it be resolve first that the admittance of he that have the estate for  year be a admittance for he in the remainder   a cro fine sur grant and render  to a for life remainder to b execution sue by a serve for b so a attornment to  tenant for life serve for he in remainder and this bring no prejudice to the  lord for a fine be not due until after admittance and the lord may assess one  fine for the particular estate and another fine for the remainder but wile say  he need not pay it until his estate come in possession after a surrender the  estate remain Ventris in the surrender before admittance of the beneficiary  and use yet where borough English land be surrender to the use of I S and his  heir and he die before admittance it be hold that his young son shall have it  second it be resolve that the possession of the tenant for year be so the  possession of he in remainder as to make a possession brother but then it be  move that the conversion be lie after the marriage and so the feme ought not  to have join with her husband in the action but the court hold that in regard  the trover be lie to be before the marriage which be the inception of the  cause of the action the wife may be join as if one have the custody of a woman  good and afterward marry her she may join in detinue with her husband for in  case of bailment the proprietor be to some purpose in possession and to some  out of possession hale say in this case the husband may bring the action alone  or joint with his wife and so judgement be give for the plaintiff
Batson et all vers sayer in Middlesex in person Raymond c I de b r there may  be a select vestry and what be lie only as a circumstance need not be prove in  a action for a false return of a mandamus to swear the plaintiff into the  office of churchwarden the plaintiff set out that he be elect and present  himself to be swear but be refuse and non to be dainties return the chief  justice hold that by law there may be a select vestry and that in this case  the plaintiff need not prove the present himself to be swear because that be  but a circumstance and not to the point of truth or falsity of the return so  also in penal action comb v Pitt burr
batt v rook a subpoena serve to testify in the guildhall and not appear a  attachment Jearvise Wheatle make oath for the serve of a subpoena upon the  defendant to testify on the behalf of the plaintiff at the guildhall inLondon  who have not thereupon appear therefore a attachment be award against he bat  plaintiff rook defendant year Elizabeth Mews dig title evidence V attendance  of witness remedy for non attendance a attachment
battery h f h f h f h f e f e battery by Webster against pain the action be  lie in London and in truth the battery be commit at Uxbridge in midlesex the  defendant plead that such a day and year at a in the county of Huntington the  plaintiff make a assault upon he and the hurt c absq hoe that he be guilty in  London snag move that the traverse shall not be go Anderson will you have he  to say absq hoe that he be guilty that he ought not for by the special matter  he have confess the battery and you will not den but that if his plea be true  he have good cause to bar the plaintiff wherefore if we shall not allow this  plea we shall take the defendant from his remedy to plead which God forbid and  in Edward fol b in trespass the defendant show special matter in London where  the action be bring in midlesex Tota curian Nelson prothonotary have show a  precedent in Edward where such a plea as this be plead wherefore the plea be  good Gouldsborough er p
battie v er brown a mistake in the declaration be not a good excuse for not  try a cause pursuant to a undertake after one rule to show cause why there  shall not be judgement as in the case of a nonsuit have be discharge upon a  undertake peremptory to try the cause at the next assize a second rule be  sayer make to show cause why there shall not be such judgement upon show cause  against this rule it a appear that after the undertake to try the cause at the  next assize a mistake have be discover in the declaration which be for the  sale of a gelding whereas the fact be that the plaintiff have sell a mare to  the defendant that as this mistake be discover and there be no count for good  sell the cause be not try and that notice have be give before the present rule  be move for of a motion for leave to amend the declaration the rule be make  absolute and by wright I and denison I lee chief justice be absent the  plaintiff ought to have be satisfy that this declaration be right before he  undertake peremptory to try the cause but foster I say that it will in his  opinion be rather too rigid a construction of the statute to hold that the  plaintiff under the circumstance of this case be oblige to try his cause at  the next assize
battle against cook and another in quare hinder before induction the clerk can  plead his patron title to the advowson h before induction the parson have law  ad remember but not in re Orig law in re send non ad remember and see black  Com vol h also infra notam e incumbent that he can plead if he resign after  the writ bring and h b as the law be if he shall be make a bishop     b that  after institution the parson may plead against a common person for then  against all except the king the church be full and provide John battle bring a  quare hinder against I cook and Richard Cooper his clerk which say Richard be  present by the dyer a er p say I cook but be not induct and the say I c make  title to the advowson through a grant from the ancestor of the plaintiff and  the say clerk will have plead the same plea and be oust for the statute e stat  c permit the possessor to plead in bar but before induction he be not the  possessor so out of the case in the statute wherefore r plead that he do not  disturb c michaelmas term Henry
BAUDINK against bushel in disms Br to the chancellor of lincoln court tithe  bigland move for prohibition to his court on suggestion of custom that all the  occupier and tenant of Skegues that be inhabitant in any place out of the  parish shall pay to the vicar only d a year for every acre and allege that the  plaintiff be such occupier and live out and conceive that sufficient  prescription be only in discharge of the occupier but per curian this be a  unreasonable custom and only invent by the country to cheat the parson also it  be a leap custom not fix to any person certain or to the land nor of any  permanence and by Keeling there be no precedent of any modus so variable and  dance
BAUMENT vers pine the agent of a regiment be only the servant of the colonel  by holt chief justice a agent of a regiment be but a servant of the colonel  and the receipt of the agent charge the colonel there be no privity between  the king or the soldier and the agent
Bawtry versus scarlet case assumpsit in consideration that the plaintiff will  confess judgement the attorney promise to defer the entry of the judgement c  Sussex John Bawbry clerk bring a action upon the case against benamin scarlet  one of the attorney of this court by bill and count that whereas ono Hutton er  p William carter Trin James bring a action of debt a against the now plaintiff  upon a obligation of a hundred and twenty pound to which the now plaintiff  appear by big attorney and require a declaration and the now defendant on the  part of the say William carter big master give the say declaration and require  the now plaintiff to confess the action and pendent pl be the now defendant in  consideration that the plaintiff will give order to big attorney to confess  the action and to suffer the say defendant to have judgement in the say plea  for the say William carter his master assume to the plaintiff that no  judgement shall be enter until after Crast annunciate and that no execution  shall be sue out until after the end of Michaelmas term next and show the  performance thereof by he and the breach of the defendant and after verdict it  be move that it be no sufficient consideration and that be impossible for he  to perform that judgement shall not be enter in the term in which judgement be  give but that be in the discretion of the court and afterward judgement be  give for the plaintiff pasch James rot jaa
BAXER against porter bail in debt on obligation conditional to save harmless  of be bail for appearance on oyer the defendant plead non injure the plaintiff  reply that the defendant do not appear per quod the sheriff do prosecute he  per debt is owed Keble law pro Keble er p cess to which the defendant demurrer  and per Keeling Ch just on Braughtons case   here be no special damage aver  not of any value therefore the prosecution be not a sufficient breach contra  per Twisden here be a suit allege it be a sufficient breach else not et  adjornatur
baxter against dean Friday Nov ante attorney Jones move to set aside warrant  of attorney which be give after the continuance day of Trin term to enter a  judgement as of Trin term and to vacat the judgement which be enter as of Trin  term before the essoin day of mich term to which Twisden and Windham incline  be the course of the court but Keeling Ch just contra that there be no more  mischief to purchaser if this relate to Trin term more than in other judgement  whereof warrant be give before the continuance day if a warrant be give by two  in due time and one seal in term and the other after the continuance day this  will relate to bind both as a obligation and per curian verbal authority to  confess a judgement be sufficient as well on security as on adversary suit and  this the clerk agree to be the course Keble er p
baxter against dean Saturday october attorney Keeling pray a warrant of  attorney to Paulet c which be cancel by practice may be enter to warrant a  judgement to be enter last term to which the court incline as well as if it be  do by mischance and Windham say a deed tear casual by sergeant mallet be and  be yet good evidence Twisden say only a action sur case lie for no warrant  Keble can be enter of any term before the date of the warrant but after it may  especial the term after the date because the dockets of the former term be not  bring in till the next term subsequent so there be no inconvenience of search  by purchaser especial if the judgement be general and not tie to any  particular term then if date after the continuance day must be enter as of the  next term but if it be tie to a particular term it must be enter as of that  term also this be a warrant to the court and albeit it be not in court yet be  not releasable by the party nor discharge by his death the court will force  they to enter it and they order a tipstaff to bring in the party that cancel  it post
baxter against Jackson Siderf pl assumpsit in action upon the case against the  defendant on promise quod warrantizaret money due by I S in consideration that  the plaintiff will carry beer to the house of the defendant it be assign for  error of judgement in the Marshalsea that the plaintiff have not sufficient  entitle himself because he have only aver the money not pay by I S and not  that the defendant have not warrant it which by Barwell he ought to do as if  it have be that he will secure the breach ought to be that he have not secure  nor warrant but have it be that the defendant will see the plaintiff pay or  have warrant in present time then nonpayment have be a sufficient breach send  curian contra that it be well enough the averment be only that be deliver it  to the defendant and the promise be to carry which be to the person and not to  any place it be well enough per curian judgement for the plaintiff
baxter against noUDSWELL boroughenglish grant to a man and his heir for three  life it shall go to his customary heir and not to the heir at commonlaw SC keb  Danv pl ejectment and upon non culp and special verdict the case be one seize  of land in borough English demise it to a and his heir for the life of b a die  leave two son a the old and d the young and whether the land shall go to a as  heir by the commonlaw or to d as heir by the custom be the question argue by  sergeant Maynard and sander that it shall go to the old son for this be not a  dissent to he as heir but a special limitation to prevent occupancy and be  take it as a special occupant and a purchaser in this case and therefore must  be heir at commonlaw but it be argue levinz by Heneage finch junior that he  take in this case as heir and so be   Rep Seymains case such a estate as this  be take as a descendable freehold and then it ought to descend to he who be  heir by the custom which run with the land and guide the dissent to the young  son and of this opinion be the court and give judgement accord
baxter against overton hill geo defendant produce a duplicate of his discharge  as a insolvent debtor and after have put in bail before a judge move in the  treasury to be discharge on enter a common appearance which upon hear the  atorneys on both side be grant and the bailpiece order to be vacate defendant  barn be consider as in custody of his bail and his person be by the statute to  be discharge
baxter and baxter when the statute of limitation be plead in bar to a  assumpsit how far payment may be give in evidence in support of such plea in a  action upon the case the defendant plead the statute of limitation and now  offer to give in evidence payment before the six year begin chief justice  eyres allow this and say that he think the general rule be that as payment may  be give in evidence upon the general issue so it may upon non assumpsit infra  sex aged and Mr prime observe that when motion be make in the king bench for  liberty to plead non assumpsit and non assumpsit infra sex aged the court  constant say they can never see any reason for they because what will be  evidence upon one issue will be evidence upon the other
baxter and dowdswell pasch car h rot heir the point of a special verdict be if  the heir of a special occupant shall inherit by custom of borough English and  by hale chief justice such heir be in by dissent and his grant over shall bind  his heir its a freehold descendible where he shall not have age nor will  dissent thereof take away entry be no estate of inheritance but the same Keble  as estate tail which wile before who the special verdict be find agree so  Rainsford so land in tail pur auter vy whether to male or female who be in by  dissent Twisden contra that the heir be in by limitation but be Lord cook  opinion he will not oppose it Adjornatur
baxter v knoll June bill for partition will lie as to tithe demurrer to such a  bill overrule supplement the bill seek a partition of tithe and casual profit  in the isle of wight demurrer thereto and   cite that there be no casual  profit and that it may be divide by writ of partition vesey senior Lord  chancellor a ejectment will lie of tithe of which the execution be a writ of  possession and the sheriff may do as much on partition as on a writ of  possession on ejectment this be not casual whether tithe will rise or not I do  not doubt but this court can divide they as it may several thing which can at  law overrule the demurrer therefore Reg lib a fol
baxter versus douglas hill geo plea of writ how to conclude a writ plead and  the conclusion be et hoc parat be verify per cur this be a good conclusion  because it be matter of fact
baxter versus FAULAM b r six penny only give with a apprentice the indenture  need not be stamp accord to stat Ann c S the single question in this case be  whether a indenture of apprenticeship where six penny be mention to be the sum  give with the apprentice be or be not void for want of be stamp accord to stat  Ann c sec and resolve by the whole court that the statute intend that when  above be pay with a apprentice a twenty part thereof shall be pay for the duty  and one forty part when less than be pay and this be a case wherein it be well  know there be no coin small enough can be pay and it seem by the two stamp of  S and d in the pound that no sum less than S pay with a apprentice shall pay  any duty and this case fall under the say of de least non curate law and there  be no occasion to have this indenture stamp accord to the say statute
baxter widow and executrix vers Burfield apprentice be not bind to serve the  executor of the master king v Eakring burr SC S p Bott by Const pl SC in debt  on bind condition for Mathias Anderson performance of the covenant in a  indenture of apprenticeship whereby he be bind to the plaintiff testator who  be a strange mariner the defendant plead that Anderson serve faithful to the  death of the testator the plaintiff reply that since the death of the testator  Anderson have absent from her service to which there be a demurrer and after  argument at bar the chief justice deliver the resolution of the court  videlicet that they be all of opinion the defendant shall have judgement and  the executrix can maintain no such action the bind be to the man to learn his  art and serve he without any mention of executor and as the word be confine so  be the nature of the contract for it be fiduciary and the lad be bind from a  personal knowledge of the integrity and ability of the master hob Vaugh keb  and keb side and they deny the case in lev a award hill Ann horn v black that  a apprentice shall be assign be hold void unless there be a custom or the  concurrence of the apprentice and they hold it be not material that accord to  cro Elizabeth the asset be liable on the master covenant to maintain therefore  judgement pro def but see Geo c which empower two justice upon application  within three month after the master decease to order apprentice with who no  more than five pound have be pay at bind to serve out the remainder of their  time with the widow son daughter brother sister executor or administrator of  such master they have live with and be part of his family at the time of his  death
bayer against barlow and his wife mich geo the writ be returnable the first  return of the term and defendant put in bail in time and plaintiff declare but  the declaration not have be deliver with notice to plead accord to the general  rule pasch Geo defendant move for a imparlance per cur this rule have be take  to extend only to case where plaintiff appear for defendant accord to the  statute but so long as the rule subsist in plain and express word require all  declaration on process returnable the first or second return of any term to be  deliver with notice to plead no construction can be put upon it contrary to  the letter and a imparlance can be deny rule absolute for imparlance urlin for  defendant Skinner for plaintiff
bayer against smith Trin bane sup refer to Finlay v Chesney QBD arrest of  judgement in a action upon the case upon a assumpsit baker bring a action upon  the case against smith and declare that whereas there be a speech concern  marriage between her the plaintiff and smith the defendant in consideration  that she the plaintiff will marry the defendant the defendant do assume and  promise to her the plaintiff that he will marry her and that afterward the  defendant in consideration that the plaintiff will discharge the defendant of  this promise the defendant do assume and promise that he will pay unto her the  plaintiff a thousand pound and that she do discharge the defendant of his  promise of marriage and yet the defendant have not pay the l accord to his  promise upon non assumpsit plead and a verdict find for the plaintiff it be  move in arrest of judgement that there be mention of two promise in the  declaration and that it be incertain to which promise the declaration relate  style report er p that that there be no temporal consideration allege but only  a promise to dissolve a contract of marriage which be a thing illegal and so  no consideration roll chief justice answer that here be a mutual promise make  by both party and there have be diverse action of late time bring for this  cause and the that have be adjudge good and the engagement to marry be not  mere a spiritual matter and this action be not to compel the marriage upon the  contract but to recover damage for not do it and it be like to a wager and  here be a temporal loss and therefore a temporal action do lie but it be  adjourn till next term to be argue again and then judgement be give for the  plaintiff for the court hold that the disengagement shall be intend to the  party himself and here be no need to express notice give of it postea
BAYGS and upper executor ex motion Shouldham against the set aside judgement  have since the action plead by the executor ultra quod he have no asset the  court say that judgement may be plead if on action soon depend also it be  unreasonable executor shall have advantage of retainer for penalty of the bind  but on full administer hale chief justice have frequent disallow it its most  reasonable that plea shall be allow that upon the several judgement plead  there be due for principal and interest so much and the executor have no asset  ultra and this course will avoid infinite inconvenience in plead to each  particular judgement that be by fraud where if one be by fraud and another be  not try judgement be here reverse roll Motwayes case and the true reason be  because it be not reasonable to give judgement against the executor de good  testator because the other Keble judgement may eat up the debt and  notwithstanding Brownl pl the court put the party to plead the bind on which  the judgement be bad since the declaration ultra quod no asset or else that  the plaintiff reply c no more be due on residue of the several judgement but  so much ultra quod no asset c at election Keble er p
Baylis v Newton equity case abridge er equity case abridge so if a father  purchase a copyhold tenement in the name of his old equity case abridge er p  son a infant of about eleven year old and lie out pound in improvement pay the  purchasemoney and all the fine and enjoy it during his life but have surrender  it to the use of his will devise it to his wife for life and after to his  young child who be otherwise unprovide for and the old son recover in  ejectment the wife and child can be relieve against it for the purchase shall  be consider as a advancement for the son and not a trust for the father though  he enjoy it during his life for the son be but a infant at the time of the  purchase pasch mumma and mumma vern vide Baylis v Newton vern
Baynard and smith ante trespass in replevin the defendant justify damage  pheasant the plaintiff reply that his cattle escape into a close call vicar in  which he use to have common by cause of vicinage and thence escape into the  defendant ground into the locus in quo c in default of repair by the defendant  who by prescription ought to repair against vicar close per curian this be a  sufficient excuse of trespass and so where ever the party bath way or any  special privilege as out of the commonhighway into adjoin ground in default of  the owner repair and judgement for the plaintiff
BAYNOW v GORGANE oath make he see a Subpna serve John Musgrave make oath that  he see a Subpna serve on the defendant ad to hear judgment about a fortnight  pass Baynow plaintiff Gorgane defendant year Elizabeth choice case in chancery  er p
Bayson versus window pasch James rotulo a action of debt bring upon a  obligation for performance of a award which be void in part and good in part  and the breach allege for that part which be good and the award be to pay  money but no time of payment allege in the award and afterward it be demand  and such demand be hold good Brownlow goldsborough if the plaintiff be  nonasuit yet no cost upon the statute of perjury
BAYSURE against LUNNE in debt Br utlary on read a record in indebitatus  assumpsit for money heretofore lend to which the defendant after imparlance  plead a utlary in the plaintiff since the money lend to which the plaintiff  demurrer it be not under seal and per curian it ought to be so but in action  upon the case it be not pleadable after imparlance but here be a duty before  which be thereby forfeit for which the party may have have debt the court  doubt on the Lord gore case in a action upon the case for money due on sale of  horse for which the party may have covenant which be never resolve et  adjornatur Windham absent
be a man make a feoff in fee to the use of himself and his wife of one another  the dawn dintius to live absq impeticione huge to make hard vitis Self the  husband die if the wife shall hold without impeachment of waste or no be move  by the sergeant and the opinion of all the court be that she shall not be  impeach of waste because of the severance but otherwise if it have be joint
be after the term it shall remain yet it be a present and not a contingent  remainder for where word refer to that which must needs happen there shall be  no contingency Borastons case   Freem SC cite per cur a have issue five son  his wife be enseint with a six devise two three of his land to his four young  son and the child in ventre sa mere if it be a son and their heir and if they  all die without issue male of their body or any of they that the land shall  revert to the right heir of tile devisor by this devise the young son eat  tenant in tail in possession with cross remainder over to each other and no  part shall revert to the heir of the devisor till all the young son be dead  without issue male of their body dyer hob a man have two son devise part of  the land to one of they and his heir and the rest to the other and his heir  and further will that the survivor shall be heir to the other if either die  without issue by this the devisees be tenant in tail with remainder in fee  execute of each other part Chadock v Cowley cro James
be against bennet baily OF westminster leet Siderf pl powis pray a certiorari  to remove presentment in leet for use trade not have serve apprentice the  Baily of Westminster have levy execution of livre at the rate of S per month  which the court grant and conceive the leet can only inquire hereof but not  try on Elizabeth and now the Baily of Westminster who Saturday June have make  out the execution come and say the presentment be a conviction be may well do  it but per curian the statute be intend distributive that such shall try who  have power and this give no new jurisdiction to the leet but leaves it to the  leet to inquire where they have power as in some of the case as of bow and  arrow they have before yet the court will give no rule herein also they  conceive that there be nothing but nuisance and sing espandue that be  untraversable and these when they concern life or freehold be traversable but  the question have be where and Twisden conceive it shall be here the court  order the certiorari to be return
be against cornett and Malpas this be a action bring against defendant on a  recognizance as bail defendant move to stay the proceed for want of fifteen  day between the testae and return of the capias ad to answer and not aid by  statute a rule be make to show cause why proceed shall not be stay on show  cause plaintiff insist that this be a matter of error and not of irregularity  the motion be improper per cur the rule shall have be to show cause why the  writ shall not be quash defendant can have oyer of the capias and therefore  can take any advantage by plead plaintiff choose to begin de to make new and a  rule by consent be make to quash the writ draper for defendant wright for  plaintiff
be against warden Intr h James b r rot judgement for therefore concession for  to look at closely be reverse for that error and so also m car b r rot Cooper  against William judgement reverse because of the word concession
be give up upon payment of the pound and interest but the reporter make a  quaere as to interest car Waller and dalt Chan can Rep tempt finch mich car  Fairfax and trigg S p decree and the court will not give interest Rep tempt  finch S c under the name of Waller and dale easter car decree that upon  payment of the pound and interest the bind to be deliver up vern Whitley and  price S p Trin vide vern pl
be in the defendant hand and the defendant plead a conveyance make to himself  of the estate in question and that if there be any such entail the same be  discontinue the court allow the plea and say they will not aid the issue in  tail against a discontinuance though by a voluntary conveyance Pasc bounce and  Phillips vern where affidavit must be make that the party who pray a discovery  of a deed c have it not in his possession vide Title affidavit letter a Eq can  Abr
be levy before the date of the deed and by consequence the deed be no  declaration of the use of that fine the father die and then b die leave issue  W and W have borrow some money of I S mortgage the land to he and die without  issue c claim under the settlement bring his bill to have it establish and  that the defect beforementioned may be supply but in regard the consideration  of b s marriage do not extend to he the court refuse he any relief mich  Staplehill and bully Prec in Chan S c e fine and recovery in what case vacate  or set aside in equity
be livid or discolored george bee rices case George bee rice tenant in tail  after possibility of issue extinct assign his estate to one a against who he  in the reversion bring a quid law proclaim and it be adjudge that he shall  attorn for although tenant in tail after possibility of issue extinct himself  be not compellable to attorn yet his assignee shall attorn for the privilege  be knit to the person who be in truth tenant in tail after possibility of  issue which can be the assignee for by the assignment the privity and the  privilege be destroy and where the defendant in a quid law proclaim be adjudge  to attorn distress infinite shall issue forth against he to compel he to  attorn and if he when he appear do refuse to attorn be shall be imprison until  he do attorn and this judgement that the assignee of tenant in tail after  possibility shall attorn be give in a court in Wales be afterward affirm in a  writ of error bring upon it in the king bench Len Leonard Elizabeth in the  common plead
be livid or discolored harvey and thomas case fine by the husband where avoid  a lease e contra the case be that the husband seize of land in the right of  his wife make a lease of it for year and afterward be and big wife convey the  land to a stranger by fine the husband die Wray chief justice be of opinion  that the conusee shall hold the land discharge of the lease gawdy contrary in  case of a rend grant or a recognizance acknowledge by the husband the conusee  of the fine shall avoid any of they but in this case the conusee meddle with  the land it self and a estate in the land be convey by the husband which none  but the wife or her heir shall avoid and if the wife after the death of her  husband accept the rend upon such a lease by that the lease be confirm I roll  title charge in Marg blow quaer it plus mich Elizabeth in the king bench
be sue by the beneficiary and trust insist that the trustee and not he be to  account and that he have already account he may be quiet as to the plaintiff  but he be decree to account to the plaintiff Trin car pollard and down Chan  can the reporter add note that the trustee be dead but that be not yield as  the reason
be within the time make by her friend to his guardian but not accept by they  and though she herself have press the match as far as the modesty of her sex  will permit she afterward marry the plaintiff and by her bill pray the benefit  of the devise the condition be answer by her to what she be capable of do have  marry a person as be urge equal in circumstance c to g but her bill be dismiss  by the advice of holt and Treby Ch justice hill W bertie and Lord Faulkland  Chan can salk S c where it be say that the decree be reverse in the house of  lord vern S c where it be say that the matter be end there by compromise can  in b r tempt W S g say appeal be have to the lord where no determination but  end by compromise c in what case a gift or devise upon condition not TO marry  without consent shall be good and bind or void be only in terror
beach and johnson how far the court will quash a writ of error Mr Kettleby  have move a few day ago that a writ of error may be quash for a variance  between the writ of error and the transcript of the record the defendant below  be name as administratrix to her husband in the transcript of the record but  that addition be leave out in the writ of error the court then order notice to  be give of the motion because they think the writ of error amendable he now  make this motion over again have give notice but the other side do not attend  and he say he apprehend he have a right to cost upon the statute for the  amendment of the law judge page say he think that the writ of error be pretty  clear amendable but if the other side will not move to have it amend he do not  see that the court be bind to do it ex duty accord the court make a rule to  show cause why it shall not be quash with cost chief justice absent vide post
beacon vers peck if there be a nichil return as to the land there may be a can  sa after a elegit the plaintiff take out a elegit and by virtue thereof levy  part of the debt upon the good and after a nichil return as to the land sue  out a capias ad to give satisfaction and arrest the body of the defendant it  be move to quash the capias ad to give satisfaction because the plaintiff by  take out a elegit have waive any other execution and for this all the old case  be cite but the court hold the capias ad to give satisfaction be regular for  there be a nichil return as to the land the elegit be but in the nature of a  common become facias upon which if the part be levy the plaintiff may  afterward have a capias ad to give satisfaction the election be not complete  unless the plaintiff have some benefit from the land for the take out the writ  be not a actual election but only in order to a election and if there be no  land there be nothing to choose and consequent no election Lancaster v fielder  ld raym S p
bead against orme p S James b r upon the traverse of a indictment upon the h  of forcible entry and upon the evidence among other thing it be resolve e a  forcible entry and one of they break open the door of Noy er p the house and  or hour after the other enter peaceable without a weapon the door be open yet  it be a forcible entry by he that be a forcible entry although no person be in  the house Noy at the time of the entry if that be a ordinary dwell house c by  Yelverton that the put back of the bolt with his hand or draw up of the latch  be a forcible entry which be grant note it be rule in full court if a sentence  be give in the spiritual court and cost tax and the defendant bring a appeal  yet if the suit do not appertain original or proper to they as tithe of tree  spend in fuel a prohibition shall be award as well to the cost as to the  principal suit notwithstanding that the h cap say that the ecclesiastical  judge shall compel the appellant forthwith to pay cost this be be the case  appertain proper to the spiritual court
bead and the king against heal and michel ante force winnington move to quash  a indictment of forcible entry be quod disseizivit lessee for year which per  curian be void quash
beak versus ken Trin W m I show in indebitatus assumpsit for ware sell against  the defendant as a executor he plead three judgement and no asset ultra the  plaintiff reply that there be so holt KB much due on each judgement and no  more and that he have asset beyond these sum such continual per fraud the  defendant rejoin general that they be all for just debt without hoc that he  permit they or any of they to be keep on foot by fraud the plaintiff demurrer  for that the traverse be to all or any whereas it shall have be several to  each judgement holt c j the plaintiff have liberty of reply to they all  several you need not aver fraud to every one for if to any it be enough to  avoid the defendant bar or he may have general say the several judgement  aforesaid be keep on foot by fraud in a general issue you must say nee the  dawn once but in a special bar it be do necessary because if false in part it  be so in the whole the case of waste in dyer for cut twenty oak be that the  defendant shall plead be do not cut they or any of they though in debt on bind  with condition not to commit waste if the breach be that he cut so many  timbertrees it be sufficient to say that he do not out they modus form in this  case the court direct the party to wave the demurrer and try the honesty of it  upon a issue c holt KB er p
beak versus Terrell pasch W m vide above hill James rot well show trespass for  take a ship c defendant plead that he be captain of a man of war and that he  take her on the high sea as a prize and carry her to and there prosecute her  and condemned her in the admiralty as a prize c demurrer holt CJ that he be  captain be well enough he need not show his commission but it do not appear  how this ship come to be a prize nor that there be any cause to seize her as  such nor that there be any war the subsequent go to the admiralty can justify  the first illegal caption beside it be not show who court of admiralty it be  nor before what judge judaic pro quer by the whole court this be a interloper  seize by the eastindia company and carry to the Indies and there condemned by  the company S admiral c
beal against tailor the better opinion be that if process be deliver to the  sheriff and he take the party without say any thing that yet it be good for  otherwise the sheriff shall be a trespasser which the law do not intend and  the sheriff have any lawful authority so to do so also it be although the  sheriff have not the process about he at the time of the arrest Noy er p
beal vers more where full cost in trespass the defendant justify for a way and  the plaintiff reply extra way and obtain a verdict and damage under S but the  court allow full cost because this be a case where the right come in question  Higgins v Jennings ante S p strange report er p
bean against elton new writ of enquiry c order to be make on the loss of the  former SC stram vide action on the case be bring against the defendant for  money due for lodging and also for money lend and the plaintiff obtain a  interlocutory judgement he execute a writ of inquiry and enter up final  judgement and sue out a capias ad to give satisfaction upon which the  defendant be take up and afterward he die in execution the interlocutory  judgement be docqueted but the final judgement and taxation of cost be lose it  be now move by solicitor general Stiange to enter up a final judgement and he  cite these case king and Bollon a a writ of error be bring in parliament of a  judgement in prohibition and the record be pick out of the attorney pocket as  he be go to the house of lord to examine it and leave be give to make out  another record from the paper and grano b Trin geo the same thing be there do  in a action on the case Evans and Thomas c east geo there the roll be  docqueted and the record afterward lose and a new one be permit to be file and  page just remember a case in the exchequer when he be one of the baron where  upon a motion either for a new trial or in arrest of judgement as the attorney  be bring up the postea it be pick out of his pocket and leave be give to have  recourse to the clerk minute Andrews chapel just the plaintiff may have a writ  of inquiry nunc pro tunc but he must have a new judgement a rule be therefore  grant to show cause why there shall not be a writ of inquiry and this rule be  afterward make absolute without any cause show contra in king Atkinson t geo  after conviction for perjury and a writ of error to the lord whereon error be  assign in the want of a venire and distringa the venire be not to be find  whereupon on the motion of Arden attorneygeneral a rule be make for make out a  new one he cite stone Overton barn and ld ray ms see Kely a stram fort b  Needham grano or granger cite stram Kely c stram
bean against Newberry ante arbitrement Keeling agree the case of cater against  style that arbitrement to assure as counsel shall advice be good this be but  the manner of a fact prescribe also the award of the umpire shall be intend of  the same nature as the first submission and need not any particular ita quod  it be de super to send forward but the rule in the first be that which must  guide the umpire a award of action between one on the one part and one of the  other where there be more party be not reciprocal wile conceive that such  award touch the premise relate to the first submission and amount to a so as  also the mother be bind on behalf of her son and the son be to have benefit by  bill of exchange and discharge of his apprenticeship and so the award be good  as to that if it be so to the other Twisden agree the ita quod govern the  whole submission as well to the umpire as the arbitrator and there be nothing  award to the defendant as in case of clement against Batch all must have some  benefit by the award hide accord the umpire be bind as well as the arbitrator  to award de super to send forward send adjornatur also by Keeling award to  enter bind to pay money be good be a present end of difference but not so when  its to perform future contingent but Windham doubt obligation to pay such  money yearly as arise out of my manor be good enough Keble er p
bean against newberry ante arbitrement the court conceive the award nought and  judgement for the defendant because the award to pay to a stranger be void  Jones pray leave to discontinue which the court refuse because here do not  appear any real debt also the party have other remedy by debt on the award if  it be good
bean against Newberry in arbitrement Br arbitrement in debt on obligation  condition to perform a award on submission to two ita quod they do it de super  to send forward by a time or choose a umpire they choose a umpire who make a  award of a general payment of and not de super to send forward as the  arbitrator ought also where there be no restraint a award may be by parcel and  the breach be assign in the umpire its ill by wile who have demurrer be make  to open the concilium but by Jones for the plaintiff its well enough be  natural to deliver up a bill of exchange to the defendant son and apprentice  to the plaintiff and he to be discharge also the submission be by the  defendant for her self Keble and her son and so whatever be do for the one be  do for the other Windham conceive the umpire only a addition of time and not  of a distinct power and therefore without any ita quod he be the same as the  arbitrator h pl especial the word be that the umpirage shall be touch the  premise also although there be no so as c herein which hide agree but contra  by Twisden on Geffee against brown Hub but all agree that this be a relation  and privity in the submission the award of the bill of exchange be mutual to  her and her son Adjornatur
bean against Newbury a and b of one part and c of the other part submit and  the award be between b and c only it be void debt upon a obligation condition  that whereas the defendant by himself and his son have submit to the award of  a and b to perform it so that the award be ready c before the first of may and  if they make none to the award of such a umpire as they shall choose to be  make the first of June the defendant plead no award nor umpirage the plaintiff  confess no award by the arbitrator but say that the umpire award the plaintiff  to seal to the defendant three obligation and the defendant to pay to the  plaintiff l which he have not do the defendant demurrer levinz and the award  be adjudge void for two cause saint for that Dothing be award as to the son  and it ought to be to every one for some part or else it be void in the whole  dly although the it quod be in the clause refer to arbitrator and the award be  make by the umpire yet the it quod by construction shall relate as well to the  umpire as to the arbitrator and for this be cite by the counsel cro cro but of  this the court for some time differ in opinion but at length all agree as  aforesaid then the plaintiff see the opinion of the court against he pray  leave to discontinue which be deny for though they permit discontinuances in  case of obligation for payment of money yet never in case of obligation for  performance of award except upon extraordinary occasion levinz er p
bean vers elton new writ of inquiry c order to be make on loss of the former  N B No cause be show against the rule andr S c a writ of inquiry be execute in  Trin and cost tax upon it but no final judgement enter up and now there be  occasion to prove the debt in chancery the writ of inquiry can not be find and  a rule be make for a new writ of inquiry and inquisition accord to the sheriff  note and that the master shall endorse the cost which by the commitment book  appear to have be tax vide ante vent Kely Derby v gold post dayrell v bridge  barn
bear against bennet arbitrement modern pl march pl in debt on obligation to  perform a award the defendant pray to be discharge on common bail live lie  three term in prison at the same plaintiff suit in a bill of livre without  declaration and per curian common bail shall be allow unless the plaintiff  will pay the cost of the former vexation and it be refer to judge Twisden to  examine the truth of the fact
bear against white and chapman toll on Inst Mainard pray prohibition to the  duchy court in bill by the plaintiff for trespass c on charter to be discharge  of toll for which the defendant destrained as servant of the corporation of  Torrington who prescribe to have toll which the court deny it be find against  the prescription on trial in issue direct by that court Keble er p
bear age soper KB a prohibition issue to the spiritual court and trover hold  to lie against a administrator for wrongful interpose soper be administratrix  of Alice soper who be executrix of James soper and she have also take out  administration de good non to James Charles bearford first husband of Alice  appoint Alice his executrix and make his child residuary legatee Alice  afterward marry with soper he in her Kenyon right possess himself of the  effect of bearford that upon the death of so per and ux bear who marry one of  the daughter of bearford have obtain administration de good non of his good  unadministered by soper and ux bear admit he have pay debt of James soper  soper libel against bear in the court of the archdeacon of totness for  intermeddle with the good of James soper and a rule nisi for a prohibition  bein g obtain Mr Hussey now show cause he admit that if bear have only  intermeddle by detain some of the effect of soper a action of trover will have  be the proper method but as the plaintiff in prohibition intermeddle general  and as the spiritual court have a right to grant administration to who they  think proper be insist they have a jurisdiction to punish bear for interfere  he cite dyer Ro Abr per cur it be a mere action of trover rule for a  prohibition make absolute
bear assignee against crane in covenant easter geo two breach be assign one  for nonpayment of rend the other for not use the land in a course of good  husbandry defendant last term pay money into court on the common rule as to  the first breach which plaintiff then refuse to accept deliver a issue with  notice of trial for last assize and afterward countermand barn er p such  notice defendant this term serve the common rule to enter the issue on record  whereupon plaintiff apply to the court and have leave to take the money out of  court with cost to the time of bring it in he first pay subsequent cost to  defendant out of the money in court if sufficient and if not plaintiff to make  good the deficiency and thereupon proceed to stay prime for plaintiff Bootle  for defendant
bear con MICKLETHAWIT car foe will that dr Bates by his will appoint that his  estate be pound be divide into two part and bequeathe one half thereof to the  plaintiff and the other to the plaintiff son a infant out of which estate  pound be in bind take in the say infant name chancery report the question be  whether the say money in the infant name as aforesaid shall be account part of  the testator personal estate dispose by his will this court be of opinion that  it be part of the personal estate and to be divide as aforesaid
bear v Hodges Feb modus for hay and all small tithe post pl bill by the rector  of Wareham in the county of ken for tithe the defendant insist upon this modus  videlicet one shilling per acre for marsh land four penny per acre for upland  Payable at Michaelmas for hay and all small tithe within the parish except hop  notam it be admit if this modus have be for tithe hay only or the tithe arise  on the land the one shilling have be too rank baron price be of opinion this  be as lie a void modus j page and Gilbert baron that it be good and decree  accord for the defendant against the modus be cite cro Elizabeth bury and  Grascomb and Jeffreys Novem gardener and Wickford for the modus smelter and  bridge hill this cause of bear v Hodges be reheard Nov before eyres chief  baron and price page and Gilbert baron and the decree be reverse to waver in  opinion Gilbert notam after this upon a new bill and cross bill the several  objection to the manner of lie the modus be cure and it be allow to be good at  last
bear v SPRACKING Feb tithe hop boppoles milk I Ro Abr Godol Rep side ray milk  post pl Dodson v Oliver Com dig it be decree by the court that no tithe shall  be pay of hoppole that tithe milk ought to be every ten meal and that in all  case where you do not make out some custom you must pay accord to the queare  as to this canon Mr ware quote the case of city v beef in Scaccario term Trin  James wherein it be resolve that the tithing of hop be settle in the cause of  bliss v chandler term S mich Nov and a modus may extend to hop or clover  though of late bring into England if the modus cover all small tithe I vent  cro Yelv green and Austin Lutw keb will tithe of hop be not to be pay till  after they be pick and before they be dry every ten measure Bunbury at  sergeant inn February
bear vers PETTIPHER how the forty mile distance from London be to be compute  as to notice of trial barn b r S c the defendant live at Aylesbury and not  have fourteen day notice of trial move to set aside the verdict upon a  affidavit that it measure fortytwo mile from London and pay for so many post  on the part of the plaintiff it be swear that it be compute to be but  thirtythree mile et per curian we must go by the usual computation our rule be  ancient than these post mile and consequent respect the computation before the  erection of post mile it be therefore hold that the notice be good Osgood v  lion post S p
bear versus gamble Saturday that June when insolvent debtor ought to be bring  up a second time upon the application of a insolvent debtor on g c the court  order the petition debtor to be bring up again upon the last day of this term  instead of the first day of the follow term for this last Act only direct in  general that the court shall by order or rule cause the petition prisoner to  be bring up on some other day to be appoint by such say court some time at  further within the first week of the term next follow the time of such  examination but soon if any such court shall so think fit and as these person  live both in the same town and the plaintiff have already have a copy of the  schedule fourteen day at least as the Act require it will be hard to keep the  defendant in prison during the whole long vacation N B by g c p if the  creditor be not satisfy but shall desire further time to inform himself the  court shall remand the prisoner and appoint another day some time within the  first week of the term next follow which be the former practice but the  present Act leaves the time of bring the prisoner up again to the discretion  of the court
bear versus GRABHAM all December in person holt c j at nisi prius at guildhall  policy alter by consent after it be write well S C holt in case on a policy of  insurance upon non assumpsit plead the case be Mr crisp be at the west Indies  send a letter to Bates to insure good on the MaryGalley of saint Christopher  captain a hill commander at London Bates carry the letter to Stubbs who writ  policy and he by mistake make the assurance on the mary captain haslewood  commander c this policy thus make be subscribe by the defendant the MaryGalley  be lose and then Stubbs apply to the insurer to consent to alter the policy to  which they agree and the mistake be mend it be object at the trial that the  mary be a stout ship than the MaryGalley and that the insurer ought to have a  increase of premimm for the alteration but it be hold by holt c j that the  action well lie and that the mistake may be set right and that Stubbs be a  good witness and he cite this case which happen when Pemberton be chief  justice a insurance be make from Archangel to the down and from the Salkeld  down to Leghorn but there be a parole agreement at the same time that the  policy shall not commence till the ship come to such a place and it be hold  the parole agreement shall avoid the write
bear versus Jackson prohibition for temporal loss a prohibition be grant on a  libel for shut up and lock a chapel that belong d to a almshouse where l a  year be grant to the parson for read Comberbach er p prayer for the parson may  have a action on the case for the temporal loss for he lose the if be do not  read and he can t read c where the chapel be lock up
bear versus vande a factor have steal the custom of several good and the bill  be to have a account and to discover whether he pay those custom or not the  defendant by his answer insist that he be not bind to answer that part of the  bill because the plaintiff who be the merchant be not entitle to those custom  nor have any advantage thereby whether the same be pay or not and it be refer  to the master whether this be a sufficient answer or not he certify it be not  and exception be take to his report Nelson the Cause be hear and it be insist  then it will be of very ill consequence and a encouragement to unjust factor  if the court shall give any opinion for they in a matter of fraud as this be  but it be say for the defendant that by the law Nelson er p and course of  merchant the factor be to have the benefit of custom steal because they be  liable to the penalty if discover and not the merchant but the court declare  that can not be a law or custom among merchant which be ground on a fraud and  so order the defendant to answer SC sub nom bon v vandal Chan Cas
Bearbrook versus bead the name of confirmation must stand for sir Francis  bawdy be Christian Thomas and confirm Francis by that name he must be call  husband shall pay for his wife clothes though buy without his privity sir  Henry Compton be sue for the clothes of his wife buy without his command or  privity and the whole court be of opinion that if the wife shall buy  merchandise and thereof make clothes and wear those clothes although the  husband know nothing of they yet he shall pay for they pasch James the court  be move to know whether the wife of a bankrupt can be examine by the  commissioner upon the statute of bankrupt and they be of opinion she can not  be examine for the wife be not bind in case of high treason to discover her  husband treason although the son be bind to reveal it Brownlow goldsborough er  p therefore by the commonlaw she shall not be examine a infant shall not be  examine if a administration be grant to one during the minority of two infant  and one of they die the administration continue still action OF debt one bind  can overthrow the other Lovelace versus Cocket mich James rotulo l action of  debt bring upon a obligation for the payment of money at a certain day specify  in the condition the defendant plead that the plaintiff at the day of payment  accept of another bind for the payment of the say money in satisfaction of the  say S and upon a demurrer hold to be a naughty plea for one bind can overthrow  another Brownlow goldsborough exception to a award pretend the arbitrator have  exceed their authority but adjudge good
beard against HINDERSON asset winnington pray leave to plead special two  recognizance ultra quas no asset execution be take there on this vacation and  the declaration deliver but the day before the essoin day as of a former term  so they can not on plene administer rally die short catalog give this  execution after in evidence and it be grant per curian
beard v lovelace a solicitor serve with process to testify order not to be  examine Thomas hawtry gentleman be serve with a subpoena to testify his  knowledge touch the cause in variance and make oath that he bath be and yet be  a solicitor in this suit and have receive several fee of the defendant which  be inform to the master of the roll it be order that the say Thomas hawtry  shall not be compel to be depose touch the same and that he shall be in no  danger of any contempt touch the not execute of the say process Berd plaintiff  Lovelace defendant year Elizabeth Mews dig title evidence VI examination of  witness privilege a legal professional confidence two solicitor
beard v travers nov that attempt to marry a ware of court clandestine on  petition relate to the appoint a guardian to miss Herbert Lord chancellor any  one as friend curian may make application for and in the behalf of a infant  though no relation as be often do in case relate to clandestine marriage  hearsay evidence and declaration be no defective proof but have weight with  the court especial when uncontradicted by any thing on the other side in the  present case such order shall be make as be make in Barry v smith and in Lord  Raymond case by Lord Talbot that this lady be not marry without leave of the  court and that neither Lord m or his son have any access to her by letter or  otherwise Reg lib a fol see the order supplement p vesey senior er p
beardmore v gilbert Feb wood ground grub up be not exempt for seven year as  barren land within the stat Edward more keb Freem Mod Carth ld raym bull n p  vesey there Rep this be a bill bring by the impropriator for the tithe of  Forley and Oakmore in the parish of Alford in the county of Stafford the  defendant in his answer insist that the ground for which the tithe be demand  be heath and barren ground and exempt by the stat Edward for seven year but he  admit by his answer that it be wood ground which have be grub up and therefore  the plaintiff counsel insist it have yield profit before and be not barren  ground within the meaning of the stat of Edward this come on upon bill and  answer and it appear from the defendant own admission that it be wood ground  grub up per curian the defendant be decree to account
Beasley against smith trinity geo motion for supersedeas for want of  declaration in this court within two term defendant commit to the fleet charge  inter all with a bill of Middlesex at plaintiff suit before declaration  deliver plaintiff deliver a declaration in the court of king bench at the  fleet not a declaration in this court which declaration in the court of king  bench against a prisoner in the fleet be look upon as null and void the rule  be make absolute prime for defendant Hewitt for plaintiff
BEASLYS case Ch just Jones r keb t Jones he be take in execution upon a  recognizance of bail and be make it appear to the court that he never  acknowledge the recognizance but be personate by another and thereupon it be  move that the bail may be vacate and he discharge as be do in cotton case cro  but t e court say since James c by which this offence be make felony without  clergy it be not convenient to vacate it until the offender be convict and so  it be do car in spicers case wherefore it be order that Beasly shall bring the  money into court and be let at large to prosecute the offender Twisden say it  must be try in Middlesex though the bail be take at a judge Chamber in London  because file here and the entry be go for sale in person lord ring c so it  differ from a recognizance acknowledge Ventris before my Lord Hobart upon h at  his chamber and record in Middlesex there to know facias may be either in  London or Middlesex hob Rep if a false bail be acknowledge it be not felony  unless it be file and so hold in Timberlys case Ventris er p
beat against hall to diversify in bar Fitzherbert Cr pl assize Br dyer Resceit  be say by the hand of a and b it be not good if by a only Edward pl fine by  two be the fine of one   b in debt upon a bind for performance of covenant I  and a be name in the bind but the indenture as plead be only betwixt I of the  one part and the defendant on the other but be re true betwixt I and a on the  one part and the defendant on the other and on Cr pl warrant of attorney for  satisfaction of judgement have against a which be against a and b or by a  which be by a and b be good but not contrary indenture make by a and b be not  good as deed of a sole Edward pl by Belknap feoff of be not maintenance of one  by nor contra so of cessavit of which be but of acre Edward pl per Littleton  upon demurrer by the plaintiff Jones move that it be a naughty plea
beat v ACOURT Jan car A D the defendant the husband put in a plea in the name  of himself and his wife and swear to the plea the wife refuse to swear the  plea allow by Lord Nottingham c to stand as to the husband
beat versus Simpson in c b army pron  interrog  be not traversable the case be  sacred scripture two habeas corpora be plead and both of different testae and  return the other side reply that he be bring up army of the first writ absq  hoe that he be bring up army of the other writ and per Treby Ch just a army  pron  interrog  be never traversable because it be not a positive allegation  but only a deduction or inference from another matter so be a prcetextu pron   interrog  and vigor pron  interrog  and per quod c for these thing nec to  increase nee to break into small pieces send to make firm so much Powell  justice agree that army pron  interrog  be in many place no more than a bare  inference but sometime when it take in matter of fact then it signify  something by way of allegation whereupon c and then it be traversable and it  may so happen that nothing else be traversable Salkeld suppose two writ be  take out against W r of the same testae but of different return and at the  different suit of a and b and afterward a procure a warrant by which W r be  arrest and be give a bailbond and in a action of debt bring on this bind the  condition whereof be for the defendant to appear die c he the defendant plead  the statute and that he be then in the custody of the sheriff by virtue of a  writ returnable on another day the plaintiff may reply that he be in custody c  by virtue of a writ returnable as in the condition of the bind non army short  catalog predict in plea to ward off mentionat quod to be concession per Nevil  Blencow justice quaere yet for this be contrary to greenvill case and against  the opinion of hale Ch just
BEATNIFF versus gardener execution c plead by a executor bill against a  executrix to have a account of asset and satisfaction of a debt of pound  secure by judgement against the testator allege a devastavit c the defendant  by schedule set forth the asset and deny by her answer any waste and for plea  to any relief say that her testator be in execution on the say judgement in  his lifetime and be discharge from thence by the express order of the  plaintiff and therefore plead such discharge in bar such discharge be a  release of the debt in law and equity and the plea allow Gilbert equity case  hear and decree in the exchequer in England tempore george I
BEAUMAND against stuart a prisoner hill geo rule absolute give plaintiff leave  to deliver a new issue proper entitle in the title of the issue already  deliver the word George be omit it stand thus Hilary term that king the second  win for plaintiff Bootle for defendant
beaumont and pierce executor of pierce breach on obligation to perform  covenant ante debt sur obligation for performance of covenant the plaintiff be  colonel and the testator agent to his regiment and covenant to pay all such  money as he shall receive upon the account of the regiment in such manner as  the plaintiff shall order the breach assign be that the testator between such  a day and such a day receive l which the plaintiff order he to pay to Mr  harriot goldsmith and he do not pay it the defendant demurrer for that it be  not certain enough but the plaintiff Comberbach er p shall have name a  particular day for the receipt be traversable but the court hold it well  enough et judgment pro quer nisi c
Beaumont versus coke Trin Jacob a exception take in ejectment because the  original be testae the very same day that the ejectment be make and adjudge  good by the whole court and one goodhall bring a original in ejectment against  hill and three other and the plaintiff count against three of the defendant  and no simul cum against the four and this matter be move in arrest of  judgement and the judgement be stay by the whole court the intent of a will  must be certain and agreeable to law
beaver against binjon bail Cr pl count in Michaelmas term and bail in Hillary  a to know facias by wile the king sergeant can be bring upon such bail be not  the same term of the declaration enter but the writ be returnable in  Michaelmas and bail in Hillary and then the declaration be mend and make of  Hillary and then a plea and verdict be have which per curian be well enough
beaver v Spratley Jan bill for tithe and lie a custom for the parishioner to  give notice of set out tithe or that there be some such custom have and  dismiss with cost the plaintiff as lessee of Mr Blagrave impropriator of  Strafield Mortimer in the county of Berks bring his bill for tithe of wheat  barley c and set forth that by custom in that parish all the occupier ought to  give notice to the person entitle to the tithe of set forth their tithe or  there be some other custom of the like nature and that the defendant have not  give notice and pray a account now upon the bear it be object for the  defendant first that it be unreasonable the occupier shall be oblige to give  notice to the person entitle to the tithe for he night live a hundred mile out  of the parish baron carter and comens think there be something in this  objection though the lord chief baron think this well enough for notice to the  servant will be good notice in that case Bunbury the second objection be that  it be too uncertain or some other custom of the like nature to which it be  answer that this bill be not to establish a custom but only for a account and  the custom be only allege as a inducement to that demand though in the first  case great certain be require because it be to be the foundation of a issue  which be general direct before a court of equity establish a custom but per  totan curian this be a fatal objection to the custom and that be the  foundation of the plaintiff demand we can decree a account without first  establish the custom and the bill be dismiss with cost
beck against cavalier baron feme after imparlance as feme sole in trespass and  assault the defendant plead that at the time of the bill exhibit she be covert  and conclude in bar and by Barwell for the plaintiff this be but as a plea in  abatement and therefore pray respond ouster which the court grant nisi
beck versus Nicholls Geo mich in c b trespass of assault battery wound and  imprisonment as also for enter and break his house and open the door of the  say house and break three lock and three bar belong to the say door the  defendant plead not guilty to all except the imprisonment and for that he  justify and on the trial the justification be find for the defendant and the  not guilty for the plaintiff and the damage S d and hold by the court that the  damage be under S he can not have full cost for the battery because the judge  have not certify the battery to be well prove neither can he have full cost  for break the house c because this be a trespass relate to the freehold the  construction of car cap sect have be that it extend to trespass relate to the  freehold and inheritance and to such trespass only which be collect from the  exception where the judge certify that the Title come in question which show  that the Act extend only to such trespass where the freehold may come in  question and not to trepass of chattel
beck versus Nicholls trin gm I pale yellow can knight stir S c No cost in a  action of trespass though special stat pound car two c S Vid Smithsend v long  ante p watkinson v Swyer post p park v Davis p Dixie v Somerfield p Carruthers  v lamb p thomlinson v white p lbbotson v brown p Foley a action of trespass  for break and open door and break and spoil lock and bolt and for beat and  wound the plaintiff verdict for the plaintiff and S d damage the court be move  for cost de increment but deny because this be a trespass against the freehold  and a assault and battery join and in the first the title may have come in  question and therefore in both case it be requisite that the judge shall  certify in order to entitle the plaintiff to full cost which he have not do  cook c p er p
becket against BROMELY if a bring partition and by that demand the that part c  and if the jury find that they hold pro undivided but that a ought not but to  have a that part c yet so a shall not have that which be due to he for the  judgement shall be variant from the demand note that in a quare hinder if the  venire fac be return the plaintiff can be nonsuit without call of the jury but  if the venire fac be not return at the day then he may be nonsuit upon the  roll without call of the jury but otherwise also in the first cause by consent  of the plaintiff himself because consensus to lift wandering
becket against tailor ante arbitrement modern pl Creamor conceive the award  good in this case on the same reason that be give in the former case of isle  and Southwell on arbitrement that one shall pay money due by the defendant to  a ship and a stranger and deliver up the bind cancel to the defendant adjudge  good and roll that the stranger be compellable in equity to receive the money  of which power this court take notice which per curian be agree as where two  be mutual bind for each other bare and Clipsams case a award to discharge each  other be good and especial breach be collateral assign contra to umpire make  judgement pro plaintiff and Keble whether the stranger be compellable or not  yet between the party submit it be well as to the discharge
Beckford against clerk assumpsit Siderf pl in indebitatus on promise at  Bellafore in part beyond sea to deliver good at London in good order the  danger of the sea except the defendant say the bill be testae Oct car and that  non assumpsit infra sex aged before to which the plaintiff say that two year  before he sue a latitat intend to declare c to which the defendant reyoyned  that at the second continuance the plaintiff do declare in trover and the  defendant do appear and the plaintiff be nonsuit to which Jones for the  plaintiff demurrer and now except against the bar that it ought to be causan  act non to grow progressively infra sex aged Keble and not non assumpsit for  here the ground of the action be not on the promise but on the not delivery  the defendant say he appear at the second continuance and the plaintiff  declare and be nonsuit without prout to stand open per record and this be  contrary to the record of continuance and therefore ought to be so aver but as  to this winnington for the defendant hold the replication ill not conclude  prout to stand open per record on plead the latitat but only general pursue be  breve sheriff non to cause to go breve c hoc a preparation be verify also by  wile by the nonsuit the first latitat be discontinue and will not support a  new action also as to the first Keble er p the plaintiff ought to have say  although there be no peril of the sea yet the defendant have not deliver but  per curian Twisdenabsente this ought to come on the part of the defendant to  show there be peril also the promise be incomplete and refer to the time  future therefore the plea ought to be quod causan act c but the party agree to  try the merit of the cause on non assumpsit general
Beckford contra Beckford the same day S c Chan r London custom decree that  where a citizen have several child and some of they be advance and some not  the advance child die the father die there shall be no consideration have of  the dead child who be advance but it be all one as if they have never be
Beckingham against scot asset in action sur case the plaintiff count on  general indebitatus assumpsit on a agreement to pay S per comb for corn or as  much as the plaintiff shall sell any of his other corn for at the next market  and upon non assumpsit plead the jury give a special verdict that the  plaintiff sell his other corn at the next market at Colchester for S d per  comb and that there be such a agreement as aforesaid si super totan means the  defendant promise prout c and per curian clear judgement pro plaintiff for  after the agreement ascertain by sale at the next market the plaintiff have  election to bring general indebitatus or special action sur case but before  such certainty it must be special
Beckingham against scot trespass Coleman pray to amend repeat in trespass for  take oat the defendant plead the fence be the plaintiff and in default of  repair the defendant cattle escape and the plaintiff have traverse the usage  to repair but no issue join but all in paper and now the trespass be general  in such a will he pray to make a new assignment of the close which the court  grant it alter nothing of the plea
Beckman against Dim wit trin geo after a trial in the court of king bench and  plaintiff nonsuit he bring a new bailable action in this court for the same  cause wherein a common appearance be order to be accept for defendant for  plaintiff
BECKROWS case in one Beckrows case in evidence to the jury c Beckrows intend  to mary a widow make a conveyance by deed of feoff of his land to several use  by which he settle his land upon the issue of the feme have issue by a former  wife but after the marriage he by much importunity procure the deed of  conveyance into his band out of the custody of the wife and also a obligation  which make mention of it and it be for performance of covenant and then he  cancel the deed and the obligation and take off the seal from they and  afterward settle his land upon his former child and die have issue by his last  wife and in action under these conveyance it be permit by the court that the  cancel deed shall be read in evidence but first there shall be testimony give  of the truth of that practice before it shall be read c a copyholder case er a  copyholder case it be say by Richardson to Harvey private that there be almost  no copyhold in England but the fine in truth be uncertain for if the roll make  it appear that some time a lesser and sometime a great sum have be pay for a  fine that be a uncertain fine and he say that he be of council in a case where  the jury find that the fine be certain and afterward by bill in chancery it be  decree upon search of the roll to be a fine incertain and that be now the  ordinary course sure by decree in chancery
become facias execute but not return notam that in a to know fac between foe  and Balton of the county of Norfolk it be hold by Popham and gawdy and not  deny by any if a become fac go forth to a Gouldsborough er p sheriff and be  levy the debt of the good of the defendant but do not return his writ if the  plaintiff after sue another to know fac against the defendant upon the  judgement be may plead this matter and the plaintiff shall be put to his  remedy against the sheriff for the sale of the defendant good S by the sheriff  be good and not to be defeat and so be a good plea in bar of the other  execution otherwise the defendant shall be put to a great mischief vide Henry  pound pound Edward to know Gouldsborough report facias pound e quaere if be  shall not lave a hearing complaint if the plaintiff take out a new to know  facias within the year
beddingfield against Onslow case by he in reversion and trespass by tenant in  possession for the same trespass post Mallory salk case brobght and declare  that he be seize in fee of a close and the defendant possess of another close  next adjoin between which close run a rivulet and that the defendant stop the  rivulet whereby he surround and drown the plaintiff close so that the  timbertrees of the plaintiff v iz a hundred timbertrees of oak and a hundred  of ash become putrify rot and perish the defendant plead that one Studman long  before the say timewhen c and all the time when c be possess of the say close  by virtue of a lease to he thereof make by the plaintiff father and that he  have pay to Studman S which he have accept in satisfaction of the say trespass  whereupon the plaintiff demurrer and after argument at the bar and on  consideration of the book of h h roll Abr cro Elizabeth love against piggot it  be resolve by Charlton levinz and street who only be in court that this be no  plea for the plaintiff in respect of the prejudice do to the reversion may  maintain a action and also Studman in respect of the possession and so another  may in respect of the shade shelter and fruit of the tree for the same  trespass and the satisfaction give to one be no bar to the other but trespass  during the plaintiff term can not he have it be find mere on the possession
bedford against OUINGTON assumpsit Siderf pl in a assumpsit on account for  money receive and for money due for merchandise Eadkins move after verdict in  arrest of judgement because that it be not say super see assumist to pay the  arrearage Keeling say that which be not a assumpsit in law without agreement  of the party be not good without say quod super see assumpsit as in the case  of buckler and angel but here there be a assumpsit as well as debt create on a  accuse computasset this be well enough Twisden contra in debt this may be  intend but when the party will make this a assumpsit he must allege it a  promise Windham say a indebitatus not say to who be good but here the party  ought to make his case for though here be ground of both yet the account be  but evidence of a promise which as a demand in trover imply a trover or  promise but the plaintiff must lie a sufficient promise in his declaration  else a account be no sufficient ground for a action sur case but only for debt  Keeling say the declaration be Keble neither in debt nor case but both on the  special matter and the conclusion be that which leaves the court to judge  whether it be a debt on assumpsit Twisden and Windham say the declaration must  be as of a promise in fact though the law create it for the natural form  remedy proper for money due on account be debt which make the difference of  opinion in Pinchons case but the action sur case be collateral Moreton agree  with Keeling Keble er p that the say quod promise assumsionem too little curan  send to contrive skilfully c non to loosen be sufficient without say super see  assumpsit especial after verdict Twisden say the conclusion be never per quod  action to grow progressively but where the demand be certain which the court  agree and have the conclusion be thus Keeling say it have be without doubt and  so if windham ground be true that something special must be show to turn this  action from debt ad jornatur
bedford v wharton Reg lib a fol may liberty give to the defendant to amend his  answer by insert and add fact
bedford versus backhouse Nov Geo two land mortgage in Middlesex and register  whether the first mortgagee advance a further sum after a second mortgagee  shall take place the case be a man have make a mortgage of land in Middlesex  and the same be duly register afterward he make a mortgage to another person  which W Kelynge be also register accord to the statute and after the make that  second mortgage the first mortgagee advance a further sum of money to the  mortgagor on the premise without notice of the second mortgage and the  question be whether the registry of the second mortgage be constructive notice  so as the money lend subsequent to it shall not be pay off till that be  satisfy and it be hold by king chancellor that it be not for the statute  declare deed not register void as against purchaser but give no great efficacy  to deed register than they have before the make of the statute and it be a  know rule in the court of equity that when a first mortgagee advance a further  sum of money without notice after a second mortgage make that he shall be pay  his whole money in the first place
bedford versus cullen Dutton and wife vouchees hill geo I amendment of writ of  entry Vid lamming v Bestland post p dean v coward post pp Shepard v Harris  post p cook motion to amend a writ of entry by put out Cowickbury and insert  in paroch de shear it appear that the deed to cook c p lead the use thereof be  right and upon produce several precedent for amendment among which be the  follow a rule be grant upon great deliberation to amend Skinner versus land  mich car I gulston a recovery be agree to be suffer of land in Alphamton and  great Hermny but suffer of land in Alphamton and Lamarse and order to be amend  foster ux versus W III cook a fine and recovery agree to be levy and suffer of  the manor of inkfield but by mistake the same be make of cook c p er p the  manor of inglefield and order to be amend in all the place both of the fine  and recovery freeman v Montague ux Trin James h and smith v the earl of Dorset  all mich W III the like amendment Tregare versus gennings east car Wyrley a  fine levy of tenement with the appurtenance in t c in the parish of l in the  county of c instead of in t c in the parish of saint S near l in the county of  c and order to be amend Abney all versus Longueville all hill Ann cook a fine  and recovery in hill car two of tenement in p in the county of wilts instead  of in p Clarendon and Clarendon park in the county of wilts and order to be  amend
BEDINGHAM and kingston HOWSEY parish in Sussex salk SC order of removal  discharge on a appeal be final as to the contend parish only salk a poor man  by the order of two justice be remove from the parish of saint m to the parish  of Kingston Howsey as the place of his last legal settlement from which order  Kingston appeal to the next quartersession where this order be discharge  afterward this poor man go to Bedingham from whence by another original order  of two justice he be again remove to Kingston Howsey which last order be  remove by certiorari into b r it be now move that it may be quash because upon  the appeal Kingston have be discharge which can not be if that have be the  last place of his lawful settlement therefore it be insist that Kingston be  final acquit say per curian the order make upon the appeal be final to none  but to the contend parish who be party to the appeal and not to stranger as  Bedingham be in this case
bedwell and Fenwick mich banc sup arrest of judgement in a action upon a  promise bedwell bring a action upon the case against Fenwick and declare that  the defendant in consideration that the plaintiff will marry e his sister he  will give his sister for her marriage portion upon his marriage with her and  for breach of this promise bring his action and obtain a verdict against the  defendant the defendant in arrest of judgement urge that the breach assign in  the declaration be not well assign foy it recite another promise than upon  which the plaintiff have declare for he eclares of a promise make to give in  marriage to the plaintiff with his sister e and he assign the breach in not  pay the unto the plaintiff so that the breach do not answer the promise for if  the money be pay to the wife which for ought appear may be the promise be not  break though she be marry but hale on the other side say that it be all one as  it be allege and that it be equivalent and reciprocal style report and here be  a refusal to pay the money assign for a breach and this be a good breach roll  chief Itistice I suppose it be all one as if he have express the very word of  the promise for the husband be to give the acquittance for the money and the  money be to bepaid unto the husband and the verdict find that they be not pay  and if money be due to a feme upon a contract dumb sola to be and after and  before the payment thereof she marry the money be to be pay to the husband and  not the wife and the money here be intend to be pay for a marriage portion  which do proper belong to the husband and they be not to be pay unto her  before the marriage and it be all one in this case as if the plaintiff have  say that the defendant have not pay the money to the husband with his wife in  marriage curian ad idem the rule thereupon be that the plaintiff shall take  his jJJd gement nisi
beebee against beebee prerogative court Michaelmas term November that a  commission of appraisement decree at the suit of a residuary legatee William  beebee die leave a widow and child the widow Frances beebee claim under a will  which be not yet propound William beebee decease son oppose it by the will the  testator leave his household good and residue of his estate to his child his  money in the stock and twenty pound to his wife and make her executrix the son  proctor on d July pray a commission of appraisement the widow proctor oppose  it and on saint September she give in a inventory on oath without any  assignation of the court the question be whether a commission of appraisement  shall be decree or not judgment sir George lee I be of opinion to decree it  because it appear lee there be several outstanding debt which it concern the  residuary legatee to have a particular account of and because the expense of  the commission must go out of the residue and so must be pay by those who  desire it and the widow will not be burden thereby I decree a commission of  appraisement
beech against paxton widow easter geo defendant who have petition to be  discharge pursuant to the lord Act be order to remain in the custody of the  warden of the fleet prison upon plaintiff give a note to pay her S d per week  every Monday plaintiff once make default of payment on the day and defendant  apply to the court to be discharge but it appear that the money be tender to  defendant the day follow defendant be remand to prison
beech and johnson vide ante this matter come on again the case of gardener and  merret be cite where the court amend such writ of error ex duty accord they do  so in the present case ex relatum
Beechers case b be in execution in the fleet for l at the suit of sir Thomas  Shirley and one swey and be there he have the liberty of the garden and to  play at bowl and upon motion for the creditor it be order by the court that he  shall be in strict custody in his chamber then Beecher sue a habeas corpus to  be bring to the court and there pray that for dispatch f some necessary and to  procure speedy payment that he may have a habeas corpus to be bring to the  Chamber of some of the justice to discourse with his creditor but it be deny b  the court for he can have habeas corpus to any place but to the court when the  party be in execution and if the warden of the fleet so do it shall be a  escape and it be say by Popham which none deny that if the party be confine to  his chamber by order of court and the warden of the fleet suffer he to have  the liberty of the house that that shall be a escape and yet it be say that  such liberty be grant to the Fleetprisoners pay a fine for it to have that  liberty under the great seal and patent yet a that time there be not allow  such liberty to Beecher
beer against Alleyn declaration against a attorney conclude and therefore  bring suit instead of seek relief hold good on special demurrer action on the  case against a attorney for good sell and deliver and the defendant demurrer  special to the declaration because it be not well conclude the word be and  therefore bring suit whereas it ought to be pet remedy and it be urge by Mr  denison for the plaintiff that this declaration be agreeable to all the  precedent in this court though it be otherwise in the common plea see barn and  no one appear for the defendant judgement be give for the plaintiff
beer against brook mich geo issue join and notice of trial give for last sit  in London within last term but a mistake be discover in the declaration  plaintiff do not proceed to trial defendant apply for judgement as in case of  a nonsuit and obtain a rule to show cause on hear counsel on both side the  issueroll not be strike into barn er p the bundle and amendment be small the  court give the plaintiff leave to amend his declaration on payment of cost of  application and for not proceed to trial and appoint a peremptory day for  trial draper for plaintiff will for defendant
Beesly against Thimbleby Friday Nov lieu style pl in ejectment on the title of  sir John Thimbleby of land in Eruham which be a parish that contain Bulby roll  where the land in question be but the fine and settlement on marriage be of  land in Eruham general it include only land in the will and Bulby have a  distinct constable and taxgathering be a distinct will and those land not  comprise by the fine and by the clear direction of the court verdict pro  plaintiff the heir against the mother defendant on the case of blandfordforum  which be between Ames and Cowley
BEETKNIFE and sir herbert Packington the notice to be give on execute a writ  of inquiry the plaintiff have bring a action against the defendant for work do  as a coachmaker upon judgement be by default notice be give that the writ of  inquiry will be execute between the hour of ten and eleven the defendant come  to attend the execution of it by counsel within nine minute after ten and then  he be tell the execution be over upon which Mr will move that the judgement  may be set aside but the court say that the defendant ought to have attend  precise at ten and that therefore they can do nothing in it but then Mr will  say that here be Barnardiston king b ten count in the declaration and  therefore the plaintiff must have begin before ten to have end so soon and  upon that the court make a rule to show cause vide post
beetle infesting beehives case mandamus Symson move for mandamus to restore a  fellow of Clarebal and have it nisi Jones for the college in Witheringtons  case wave the day that he have to show cause because he intend to make a  return otherwise it have not be grant until the case end demise h demise  legacy to be take out of the issue and profit of the land tree wood and timber  and after make his wife executrix and after demise his land issue and profit  to her for the payment of his debt c without name the wood tree c yet good per  curian and the profit of all shall be to the same purpose and not leave to  descend to the heir as if land be demise for payment of debt the executor may  sell though authority be not special give they but otherways if such device  have be for legacy only or for raise portion c there have be no remedy but in  chancery against the heir
Beeton v darkin equity case abridge er on the statute for the better settle of  Intestates estate the question be on that clause of the statute that there  shall be no representation among collateral beyond brother and sister child  whether to be intend of brother and sister to the intestate or whether when  distribution fall out among brother and sister though remote relation to the  intestate representation shall be admit and the court hold that the  representation shall be only between the brother and sister to the intestate  Trin maw and Harding vern S p resolve on a motion for a prohibition in b r pet  case salk will Rep S c vide Beeton v darkin vern S p but no resolution
before any replication file or examination in chief the witness die and it be  move that this deposition may be read and it be likewise pray that it may be  make use of at law although by the strict rule of the commonlaw no deposition  of witness take de bene be or before issue join can be read or give in  evidence and that the defendant may be order not to oppose the read of it at  the trial there which my Lord keeper hold reasonable for that otherwise a  examination de bene be will be to no purpose Masden v bind vern whether such  evidence ought to be admit at law salk salk cro Elizabeth hard raym hob godb  if one make a will and afterward become a lunatic a bill will not lie to  perpetuate the testimony of the witness to it in the lunatic lifetime vide  sack fill v Ayleworth vern if there be two person and each of they pretend to  be the purchaser of a reversion after a estate for life and one of they  exhibit his bill to try his Title and to perpetuate the testimony of his  witness such bill will be dismiss not be proper in the lifetime of tenant for  life vide Hitchcock v Sedgwick vern
BEGUALL against Owen Beguall bring a writ of partition against Owen before the  justice of assize at the grand session in Anglesey and the defendant plead the  general issue the plaintiff prefer a bill in English and say that Owen be  tenant in common with he and that diverse of his hetley witness which can  prove his title be so age that they can come to the session and desire a  commission to examine the witness concern the title in perpetuan rei memory  and henden move for a prohibition for that that cause will be dangerous for  the subject that such testimony take in his absence shall be for trial of his  title second that that examination before the trial be against the statute of  h and although they have it in chancery yet it be not so here but it be deny  by the court for there be never see such a precedent of a prohibition to a  grand session and by Yelverton they have it in chancery and if it be not  prescribe in what manner they shall have it it shall be as in the chancery  Hutton that commission be not prejudicial to the subject although a  prohibition be grantable for such testimony be not use but after the witness  be dead and a man can preserve they alive and perchance his title rest upon  their testimony hetley er p
BEHEMA versus james b r Copy of process serve without the defendant name to  the notice at the bottom be have a copy of a latitat be serve upon the  defendant without his name to the notice at the bottom of the copy and it be  move by Mr Hussey to quash the latitat which be do per tot cur and they say it  have be often so rule and that the stat geo express require it faucet for the  plaintiff oppose it strong
Belgrave and thompson the certainty require in declare in a action of trespass  upon a writ of error on a judgement by default in the common plea in a action  of trespass Mr reeves take a exception to the declaration that it charge the  defendant with take fifty pecias means quadrat England squaretimber which be  too uncertain for means signify any sort of matter whatever and beside there  be a proper Latin word for timber which be maremium he say far that it be  necessary for the plaintiff to have set forth how much of one sort of timber  the defendant have take and how much of another and upon these exception he  obtain a rule that this matter shall be further consider of but now Mr  fazakerly come and cite other case where declaration have be as lose as the  present one and yet they have be hold good particular he mention a case upon  his motion where so many pecias the Cross England end of board be hold good  and yet there may be many sort of end of board then to the second exception he  say it be true indeed the number of piece be requisite to be mention but never  the nature of they for that will make great prolixity in plead beside he take  notice that the statute for the amendment of the law have extend all the  statute of Jeofails after verdict to judgement by default and therefore there  can be no doubt of this matter at this day the court say that they have  consult Littleton dictionary and have find means to be a proper word for  timber and that will put the chief matter in dispute beyond question and as to  the other matter they think it not material accord affirm the judgement
Belgrave v hertford earl OF cost pay to a witness before he be examine  Laurence hide gentleman be call upon by process by the plaintiff to testify  inform this court that he be ready to depose so that he may first have his  cost to he allow which this court think reasonable Belgrave plaintiff Edward  earl of Hertford and William Drury defendant year Elizabeth
bell against CRAKENTHORPE and other of three brother if the second be murder  the old also die within the year and not have bring any appeal whether the  young may have it in appeal by bell against Crakenthorpe and other the case be  there be three brother and the second brother be kill the old die within the  year not have commence a appeal whether the young brother shall have appeal be  demur a if the heir die pen a appeal commence by he it seem agree that no  other heir can proceed in such appeal or commence a new one and it seem the  strong opinion that if the right of bring a appeal be once vest in a heir who  die without bring any the right to the appeal be go for ever and if a heir die  after judgement give against the appellant it be questionable whether his heir  can sue out execution hawk p cor see vin ab appeal b Com dig appeal a
bell against partridge Monday July ante sewer Siderf pl the court deny a  certiorari to the commissioner by stat car cap to remove their order until a  decree make by they for the level of the fenns because this court can do  nothing as in the commissioner of sewer which be at commonlaw they can but  this be like the commission of bankrupt in which case if they decree contra to  law the party have his remedy by action
bell against Simpson trinity geo defendant in custody for want of bail the  acetiam be for debt the declaration a plea that defendant render to plaintiff  which c the count single for rend without any additional count on a P  of  mutuor or otherwise for the residue of the now to prevent a supersedeas after  the second term from delivery of declaration expire plaintiff desire leave to  add a second count whereby to make his declaration good from the delivery  which be a favour not to be grant matter of amendment be pure at the  discretion of the court have bail be put in they will have be discharge and so  must defendant person be a count can be add after the second term rule that if  plaintiff consent to a supersedeas within six day after term he may amend  otherwise not will for plaintiff pool for defendant Cunningham er p Cunningham  report report of case argue and adjudge in the court of king bench in the  seven eight nine and ten year of his late majesty king george the second  during which time the right honourable the earl of Hardwicke be lord chief  justice of that court Cunningham hilary term george king in b r Philip Lord  Hardwicke Lord chief justice sir Francis page Knt sir Edmund probin Knt  William lee Esq justice John will Esq attorney general Dudley rider Esq  solicitor general
bell and clarke ejectment deliver declaration a entry but not a eviction a  delivery of a declaration in ejectment be a sufficient entry for recovery of  mesne profit because the party be estopped by the verdict but it be not a  eviction in law so as to be give in evidence to bar a demand for rend
bell case a action of debt be bring by bell upon a obligation against one as  heir of the obligor sure brother and heir and the defendant plead reins per  dissent hetley er p from the obligor and upon that issue there be a special  verdict find that the obligor seize of land which descend to his son W who die  seize of the land which descend to his uncle who be the defendant Crowley two  thing be require to maintain the action whether the defendant be heir second  who hold land by descent from the obligor now be heir at commonlaw and now the  heir for the manor shall be charge in debt as well as the heir at commonlaw  dyer all brother in gavelkind shall be charge h the heir of the party of the  mother shall be charge and so shall basterdeign e heir by boroughEnglish and  in this case r be not heir but for the manor yet he shall be charge Elizabeth  dyer by the justice and the defendant here have land by descent from the  obligor by which he shall be charge which be agree by the whole court but by  Richardson it be not sufficient that he be heir in blood and heir by the manor  but he ought to have also land to he by descent from the obligor but here the  plea be that the land descend to he immediate and for that you ought to have  plead that the obligor die and land descend to W his son and heir who die  without issue seize of the say land which descend to r his uncle as brother  and heir to the obligor quod to be concessurn per totan curian
bell versus chaplain in a action upon the case upon a promise the case be thus  the plaintiff have deliver another man good to the defendant and the defendant  thereupon promise in consideration of a sum of money give he by the plaintiff  to deliver they to the owner and do not deliver they in this case the  deliverer or the owner may have a action against he but they can join where  the consideration be not joint as when in consideration of ten shilling give  by two man a man assume to do something to or for they several or to or for a  stranger but if the consideration be several as for example in consideration  of ten shilling pay by one and ten shilling by another there they must sever  in the action and if a three person be to have the benefit of the promise as  in the case of father and son where a promise be make to the father for the  benefit of the son there they can join but either of they may bring the action  but in that case the declaration must be upon a promise make to the father  though the son bring the action so if in consideration of five shilling give  to the defendant he promise to pay so much to one and so much to another be to  who the promise be make may bring the action and the breach of promise and the  consideration give be a sufficient damage to he per curian
bell versus Simpson c b a award help after a verdict debt upon a award whereby  it be award that Simpson shall pay bell and that they shall give mutual  release of all action and demand until the date of the say recite bind of  arbitration Inarrest of judgement after a verdict it be object by sergeant  pool for the defendant that it do not appear in the declaration or in any part  of this record that there ever be any bind of arbitration so that it be  impossible to say till what time this award make a end of matter in difference  between the party and for any thing that appear this may be a parole  submission curian the defendant have plead no award the plaintiff have reply  and assign a breach for nonpayment of the money this may have perhaps be a  good objection at the trial but after a verdict we will suppose that the  arbitration bind be show at the trial and be agreeable to the release so there  must be judgement for the plaintiff sergeant will for the plaintiff Wilson  king bench hilary term geo two
bell versus thatcher in error upon a judgement give in the court of common  plea where the plaintiff in a action upon the case declare that he have be  retain by the under postmaster to carry about post letter of which he make a  profit and have behave himself honest in that employment and that the  defendant to defame he say he have break up letter and take out bill of  exchange which bring he to such discredit that he lose the say employment and  judgement be give for the plaintiff and error assign upon the matter for that  the word do not import but that he may break open the letter by the direction  of those to who they be direct neither do they express that they be post  letter and the innuendo will not help it unless there have be such a  signification in the Ventris word neither be it such a employment that a  action shall lie for scandalize also the plaintiff do not declare that he be  retain for a year and seem to be little more than a common porter and for  these reason by the opinion of the court the judgement be reverse and hale  principal from the quality of the employment for he say a man shall not speak  disparage of a man cook or groom but a action will be bring if such action as  these shall be maintain
bell who tam and wyat how far the court will give leave that a prosecutor  shall compound his prosecution in a information who tam upon a usurious  contract Mr harvey move that the prosecutor may have liberty to compound the  forfeiture he observe that in the exchequer such motion be frequent and judge  page say he remember that the same have be allow here accord the court make a  rule to show cause
Bellamy against alden a administrator account before the ordinary and a  creditor of the intestate take exception to it and aver that the administrator  have not pay so much and the administrator prove payment by one witness and  for default of better proof he be excommunicate and a prohibition be award  because the ordinary have not power in such a case to hold plea and to try the  payment or not payment or administer a interrogatory to a witness but ought to  accept the account as it be for the creditor may sue for their debt at the  commonlaw and then payment or not payment shall be well try and there one  witness will suffice e exec a executor shall not have a account against his  companion
Bellamy against BALTHROP Intr m car Br rot the court that where the defendant  in trover c justify by lease of the tithe c by the impropriator for a year  that yet it be mere void without deed otherwise if it be by lease of the tithe  of a year by the parson himself and that so it be rule James b r Bennet  against spell
Bellamy against russel covenant breach well assign though not direct within  the word begin p Nels Abr pl ibidem c by covenant in a charterparty the party  mutual covenant that the master of the ship who be the plaintiff shall pay two  part of the portcharges and the defendant factor the three for the whole  voyage in a action of covenant the plaintiff show that he sail his ship from  London to Cadiz and there he pay all the portcharges both the two part for  himself and the other part for the defendant and that the defendant have not  repay he his part after judgement by nil to say and a writ to inquire of  damage return pollexfen for the defendant take two exception that here be not  a sufficient breach for the defendant be not bind by the covenant to pay the  plaintiff the say three part but to the collector of portcharges and therefore  he ought to have show that the defendant have not pay his three part say non  allocatur for whereas it be aver that the plaintiff have pay the three part it  shall be intend that the defendant do not pay it and the plaintiff be force on  his default to pay the whole otherwise the ship will be stop in the port it be  not allege that the portcharges pay by the plaintiff be pay in this voyage  curian it shall be intend to be the same voyage for they be pay in the same  port where the say voyage be allege to have be make judgement pro quer nisi c
Bellamy and hunt Saturday may two Maynard except against a new trial on non  assumpsit plead and special a verdict find subsequent agreement by write and  break by the plaintiff and if pro plaintiff pro plaintiff damage l which be  say to be excessive be all that be promise and by the subsequent agreement  there ought to be abatement though judgement be agree must be pro plaintiff on  this issue and the court agree that a special verdict may be as to damage only  on non assumpsit and hale chief justice say it be so adjudge in a case where  he and Maynard be of council and if it appear by the verdict that the  plaintiff have not perform he shall not have so much damage but if in  substance it be perform it be sufficient and out of the issue also the late  agreement be offer as a discharge of the promise and not in mitigation of the  damage the verdict bad no regard to that and therefore the court refuse to  grant any new trial
Bellamy Vers barker word nient actionable after verdict pro quer for these  word your father be a horsestealing rogue and you be a great rogue the  judgement be arrest because not actionable vide Jones v hearne will and the  authority cite Com dig title action for defamation f
Bellasis v MERNHAM word lie only with a innuendo and not to be speak of the  plaintiff in case for word and verdict pro quer on non culp a exception be  take in arrest of judgement that it be not allege that the word be speak de  eoden quer only lie he innuendo the plaintiff be a c and cro James be cite in  point et per Eyre justice they do not signify the plaintiff more than any  other man in the world unless tie up by the averment jud arrest quousq beyond  to move
Bellasis versus BURBRICK mich W salk by holt car in action of debt for rend  due upon a lease at will the plaintiff must show a occupation for the she be  due only in respect thereof and therefore it must appear to the court when the  lessee enter and how long he occupy but in debt for rend on a lease foe year  the plaintiff need not set forth any entry or occupation for though the  defendant neither enter nor occupy he must pay the rend it be due by the lease  or contract
Bellasis versus BURBRICK mich will c b ld raym in debt for rend on a lease at  will occupation must be show vent Mod side Leon hall dyer Lutw S C n l holt  vide Doug Eaton v Jaques Henry Bl t r Auriol v mill in debt for rend upon a  lease at will the plaintiff must show a occupation for the rend be only due in  respect thereof and therefore it must appear to the court when the lessee  enter and how long he occupy but in debt for rend upon a lease for year the  plaintiff need not set forth any entry or occupation for though the defendant  neither enter nor occupy he must pay the rend it be due by the lease or  contract and not by the occupation
Bellew against bullock the defendant upon a not in destroy foot of a hedge for  a commoner there they be fine every one S and the plaintiff for sue in that  court for that not be fine and so both party fine which be seldom see before
Bellingham against ALSOPP adjudge that if the bargainee before enrolment  bargain and sell the land to a and within the month respective both the deed  be enrol that the bargain and sale to a be not good and by walmsly if the  seize bargain and sell and the disseizee release c to the bargainee and upon  evidence agree by the court that if the bargainor continue possession after  enrolment that Noy he be a seize for the statute transfer the franktenement to  the bargainnee
bellow and pew how far the court will stay proceed in a action on bring into  court what be good fide due vide post S c the plaintiff have declare for S d  for rend and S upon a P  of mutuor upon which Mr Hervey say that there be no  colour that any thing more be due than the S d and the S be only add to make a  cause of it in this court he say if this practice be allow it will lead to a  great deal of oppression and therefore he move that upon bring in the money  due upon the first count with cost proceed may be stay the court say that they  have never go so far as to allow money to be bring upon one count but however  as this be such a piece of evasion the court make a rule to show cause
belly and other against algor outlawry reverse without writ of error for the  omission of three separalibus a day in the writ of proclamation note that this  term a outlawry of one William algor at the suit of William belly and other be  reverse on good consideration in the bench without writ of error because these  word usual put in the writ of proclamation S make upon three several day  thereof one proclamation c be omit by the negligence of the exigenter who be  Scrogges and his clerk whereby the writ do not bear any sense accord to the  intent of the statute h c and a precedent of reversal be show namely h Rotulo  Benl pl be see because the writ of proclamation do not malice mention to what  sheriff the defendant shall render himself c see east Eliz fol b pl cost
BELNIFF and pople and wife slander go tell your mistress whore c say to the  maid servant bigland pray a prohibition send non allocatur since the time that  adultery and fornication be punishable temporal there have be no prohibition c  prohibition be deny per curian
Belshaw against porter a rule nisi to change the venue discharge the word of  the affidavit whereupon the rule be make be that the action do arise in the  county of buck and not in the county of Middlesex or elsewhere out of the  county of buck to defendant barn knowledge and belief which be not positive  and therefore insufficient Skinner for plaintiff comens for defendant
Belvin S case Comberbach er report date king versus the parish OF trinity in  exeter Belvin S case poor S settlement overseer of saint George S be to remove  and they of Trinity to receive and a order be direct to both parish to remove  and receive and therefore quash for it be entire and though Prat say here be a  good judgement that they be last legal settle in Trinity parish yet the court  answer that be but the opinion of the justice and the foundation of their  judgement which be that he be remove c a overseer be indict quod cum such a  order be make he have disobey d it and now grove move to quash it for the  incertainity of the quod cum but holt say it be well enough by way of recital  he confess he have know a order quash d for that exception but it always  against his opinion
BELWOOD against chamber executrix four judgement have be sign against the  defendant who have complain against plaintiff and Mr rowning her attorney for  vexatious proceed in multiply suit and have obtain a rule for plaintiff and  rowning to show cause why two of the judgement shall not be set aside with  cost and upon show cause it appear that the first judgement be after a verdict  sign post death to ward off secundum to cause to stand the second be a action  of debt upon the first judgement wherein plaintiff recover de good testator  the three suggest a devastavit be a judgement de good not common with others  the four be in a action bring upon the three judgement wherein defendant be  hold to bail wherefore it be insist by plaintiff that the whole proceed be  perfect regular and that the three judgement which be the first whereupon  plaintiff can bring a action of debt to hold to bail be the first complete  judgement defendant have bring a writ of error whereupon the second judgement  be affirm in the court of kingsbench and lie by till after the four judgement  before she make any complaint of irregularity or vexation without ever offer  any satisfaction for plaintiff demand for defendant it be urge that a  devastavit may have be suggest on the first judgement and that multiply so  many suit be vexatious and oppressive and a case be quote Cooper against  draper Trin Geo where the court have order a attachment against Mr Welland the  attorney for load the defen barn daunt with action upon action of debt upon  judgement court be of opinion that no irregularity appear in the plaintiff and  that the proceed be warrant by law if there be any hardship upon defendant it  be occasion by her own stand out and therefore discharge the rule chapel for  plaintiff and rowning Eyre for defendant
BENBRIDGE versus day hill W m B R demurrer to declaration in trover de dvobus  fulcr salk S C holt trover for several thing and among the rest de dvobus  fulcr the defendant demurrer and holt c j refuse to give judgement quod nil to  take in hand say the plaintiff Salkeld er p may take several damage and  release as to this and then take judgement as to the rest and all will be well
BENBRIDGE versus day hill W m salk the plaintiff bring trover for several  thing and among the rest de dvobus fulcr the defendant demurrer general and  pray judgement holt CJ refuse to give judgement quod nil to take in hand but  say the plaintiff may take several damage and release as to this and then have  judgement as to the rest and all will be well in this case
BENBRIGG versus day hill will B R salk where the plaintiff may take several  damage and release they as to one thing which be incertain trover for several  thing and among the rest pro dvobus platform and upon a demurrer to the  declaration for that falcris be a insensible word holt Ch just will not abate  the declaration because he say that the plaintiff may take several damage as  to the other thing and may release they as to this word and so take judgement  for the rest
bend against mico c executor OF sir Samuel mico Tuesday April bankrupt in  action of trover by assignee of the commissioner of bankrupt both party admit  the be a tradesman the bankruptcie now the petition and the transaction of the  commissioner and insist only on a bill of sale which the plaintiff say be  fraudulent the defendant say be good fide by Edward mico the bankrupt April to  his sir Samuel mico of pipe of wine whereof be tender and of use only for  strongwatermen and the evidence offer be deposition before the commissioner of  the bankrupt himself which per curian be good enough but Keble er p the  defendant council oppose they they prove viva voice what the bankrupt confess  the defendant except to a witness because he be a creditor and may come in  before a division make but after four month after any dividend he be a good  witness for no other dividend shall be intend but here no division be make he  be set aside the court say if good of bankrupt come to the hand of a and be  sell to b no trover lie for the money or good but the commissioner have power  only of the money but on sale to a by the bankrupt the commissioner may elect  to have money or good
bend case in a suit depend in this court between bend and another for a close  it be order and a injunction accord award that the defendant shall suffer the  plaintive to enjoy the say close with the appurtenance until c and contrary to  this order the defendant have put his cattle into the close and thereupon a  attachment issue to answer this contempt and he say that be put in his cattle  for a title of common and it be rule that this be no breach of the injunction  because the common be not in question in the bill but only the title of the  close wherefore he be discharge of the contempt and with the appurtenants noth  not include the common to be take in the say close
bend v allot the defendant wife examine as a witness it be inform that Colston  one of the defendant examine his own wife as a witness it be therefore order  the plaintiff may take a subpoena against her on his behalf and if Colston  caryi will not suffer her to be examine on the plaintiffs party then her  examination on the say colston party be suppress bend plaintiff Allot and  Colston defendant year Elizabeth
bendick against thatcher b have recover in the common bench against t by  judgement t petition the king to refer the matter to three justice they make a  award b will not stand to it t sue he in the court of request for performance  of a award b confess the reference but deny his consent to it or assent of the  award and yet for not stand to that award he be commit to the fleet by the  court of request and now b bring a habeas corpus and by the court this  difference be agree when the party submit himself to a arbitrament by a  extrajudical course as by consent there he can be sue in equity or imprison  for nonperformance of the award unless he have any time agree or assent to it  but when by any court the matter be refer to gentleman of the country and the  party will not stand to it the court may commit he for upon the matter that be  the award of the court so that now in our case b be let out upon bail yet the  court will not grant a prohibition to the court of request and cook chief  justice in that difference before say confident that the party may have a  action upon the case if the other will not perform the arbitrament by which he  be damnified quod no one dedixit
BENDISON against sir John Lenthall escape style pl powis for the plaintiff  pray to have the defendant who be marshal of the Marshalsea in execution and  by foster and Windham if he will not pay his debt the court will appoint  another marshal in his stead and so commit he else it will be a escape of all  the prisoner per curian
BENDSON against dowry Monday Nov action sur case in dell Fitzherbert franklin  against Amos pasch car in b r pl rot adjudge that a action of faux  imprisonment lie not on want of the body or to take in hand corpus return  because Keble be can return nothing else and Twisden say he have know the  sheriff amerce for a special return since the statute h which alter not the  return but order security to be take by the sheriff and because the plaintiff  bailiff of Westminster have return a bill of Middlesex with a supersedeas out  of the chancery because it be with a ac etian the court conceive the return  void and give he only four day to return his writ in pein of livre and will  not suffer he to take he by a new writ
bene against TRICKET Intr t Elizabeth b r the point of the case be if the  value of the church for plurality by h shall be eight pound accord to the book  of rate and valuation in the first fruit office or accord to the for value of  the church per annum Atkinson that accord to the value of the king book for  the parliament never think that any man can live upon so little as eight pound  per annum which be not six penny a day note e and dyer but by the court that  it shall be accord to the very value of the church in yearly value in the  statute of h and by gawdy and Fenner to who agree Yelverton that the eight  pound shall be account accord to the very value of the church per annum
beneficiary and trust in tail under a devise of land charge with annuity bring  a bill against the trustee to the intent they shall join in a recovery this be  not proper but it be proper to pray that the trustee may convey the premise to  beneficiary and trust in tail who may then suffer a recovery though if the  trustee be also trustee for a annuity subsist they be not compellable to part  with the legal estate out of they to the beneficiary and trust in tail east  Carteret and Carteret will Rep
beneficiary and trust of a inheritance bind himself and his heir in a bind  this trust be not asset to the heir though question in Lord Chan hide time but  clear the trust of a lease for year be asset to charge a executor in equity  east car attorney general and sand in chess Freem Rep Nels Chan Rep SC and p  Chan Rep
beneficiary and trust of a term upon his wife be join with he in a sale of  part of her jointure direct that after his and his wife be death his trustee  shall assign the rest of the term to his wife be daughter when she shall  attain the age of twentyone or be marry the daughter marry and she and her  husband assign their interest in the term in the lifetime of beneficiary and  trust and his wife and the question be whether such a possibility can be  assign and per ld king it be a notion that have obtain at law that a  possibility can be assign yet if it be res integral there be no reason for it  yet the rule of law must be the rule here for equitas sequitur law and he  dismiss the plaintiff bill which seek the benefit of this assignment but  without cost freeman and Thomas mich vern yet a possibility may be release for  the law hold it unreasonable that there shall be a encumbrance with a man  estate which can in any way be discharge ibidem b the privity OF contract or  estate be destroy what remedy grantee or assignee shall have against each  other in equity if a lease to b a WineLicence for year render rend and b  assign to c and c for valuable consideration ssigns to d who have no notice of  the rend a shall charge d with the rend for the contract be personal as in  case of a lease of a fair c and justice sequitur law especial when the  assignee be a purchaser for valuable consideration without notice equity case  abridge mich James and blank hard but if he have be a purchaser with notice he  will have be liable in equity during his enjoyment though there be no privity  city of London v Richmond vide vern see the book
beneson and stride devant this term the court give judgement in this case and  the whole court hold that the entry of he in remainder be good for by the  attainder of the copyholder his estate be forfeit at commonlaw and be a person  disable to hold it the lord can hold it against his own grant and that  therefore he in remainder shall enter they hold that the king have pardon the  copyholder avail he not for he can hold nothing he have before the attainder  and therefore if a surrender be make into his hand where the custom be to  surrender into the hand of copyholder the surrender will be ill they hold that  a presentment in the court be not necessary that be only to inform the lord  they hold that if in the three resolution of Podger S case the estate have be  to begin upon a forfeiture it will commence present and say that if a lord  have good little dog felon make a lease for year and after make another lease  to commence after determination forfeiture c of the first and the lessee have  be attaint of felony that here the second term Skinner will commence but if  the lord have not have the felon S good it will not because that then the  first estate fall to a stranger and not extinguish in the freehold will have  continuance wherefore c Bulst
benet and benet notice in debt upon article to surrender at the court of  Puddimore upon notice the defendant show that notice be allege at London the  day of the court hold and that Puddimore be above mile off and so no  sufficient notice the plaintiff reply he have sufficient notice to which the  defendant say he have not to which the plaintiff demurrer and special on the  paper book show that issue be on the time and place of notice which be not  material but only put for a visne but by hale chief justice though the time  and place of notice general be not material yet here it make the case and the  surrender to be thereon be penal and therefore he advice the plaintiff to  discontinue Adjornatur
benet and mouse Commission in trespass the defendant justify as tenant of  Edmonton for common from and after chiefs clipping after Lammas to ladyday and  as in Edward that none may put in cattle during that time to which the  plaintiff demurrer because be lord and have chiefs clipping he can be exclude  but by a prescription for sole pasture and to this the court incline it be to  lie fresh after the tonsure until LamasDay in meliorationem of the common and  the cattle be put in after tonsure and before Lammas for which action upon the  case may lie but the commoner can distrain before his interest begin which the  court agree but Noy and Cr and roll Abr Adjornatur
benet and thorn ante bail per curian predict the defendant for the plaintiff  to go away be certify as the recognizans its void come to pledge be not  sufficient to excuse the officer alone say adjornatur as the latter
benet and thorn hill car two rot bail in trespass the defendant justify as  baily of inferior court of record by process there on plaint by I S against  price for who the plaintiff benet be bail there and that judgement be give  there and that there be a custom that if bail do not render the body that then  the plaintiff may take a firi facias against the good of the defendant and  bail together which be do direct to the defendant who by virtue thereof  justify the take the Keble good to which the plaintiff demurrer and show for  cause special that this custom to take principal and bail together without  capias or know fa against the principal be void pl adjornatur
benn against den on the demise OF Mortimer and his wife in ejectment a former  ejectment have be bring on the demise of the same lessors wherein defendant  have a verdict and obtain a attachment against Robert Mortimer one of the  lessors for nonpayment of cost whereupon he be arrest and detain in custody  and now Bootle move for defendant to stay proceed in this ejectment till the  cost of the former be pay but per cur the lessor of the plaintiff be in  custody upon say attachment for cost which be in the nature of a can sa there  be no reason to grant the rule
benn against geary a rule be make for plaintiff to show cause why defendant  shall not plead double videlicet non assumpsit and non assumpsit infra sex  aged plaintiff on show cause produce a affidavit that defendant have not  appear and consequent not be in court be not proper to make the motion rule  discharge chapel for plaintiff birch for defendant barn er p
Benner and hill replication to plea in abatement where one plead in abatement  a matter of fact and the plaintiff reply and traverse the matter of the plea  he may conclude either judgment si action or quod to answer ouster for if the  defendant join issue it will be final if demurrer it will be respond ouster  but if the joinder in demurrer conclude in bar this ill per holt Ch I where a  rule be enter into by consent to refer a matter to the judge of assize there  needs no motion to make his order a rule of court for the former rule give it  a sanction
bennet against bawd ante Siderf pl executor on issue that one of the executor  of the will have administer which be collateral without demurrer or plea in  abatement that there be more absent then by the administrator be name Twisden  conceive that by oyer pray this be make parcel of the plea and so although  verdict be on collateral point if on the whole record as here the plaintiff  have no cause of action he shall have no judgement as in debt on obligation  the defendant plead as Hub it be to affirm award and no award make if the  plaintiff set it forth without assign breach on issue find that there be such  a award on nul tiel plead the plaintiff shall not have judgement there be no  default in the defendant Windham contra on the same ground for here be no  default in the plaintiff nor have he any cause administer by the defendant to  set forth the truth but be force to follow the defendant plea and take issue  that there be no executor but if in debt on bind the defendant pray oyer and  it be to perform a award and then the defendant plead release which be find  against he the plaintiff shall have judgement and if in our case in the count  there have be two only name to be alive or absent and there be three the  plaintiff have clear fail but he be lead away by the defendant plea its good  enough hide chief justice accord with Windham but by agreement the count be  amend and trial this term
bennet against clerk prohibition Trevanian pray a prohibition on libel in  Exeter for say the plaintiff be a base lie knave and take a faux oath before  Glyn a justice of peace of the county in a case between matthews and clerk  which the court deny albeit the word be actionable yet they proceed only pro  reformation morum and the court will not intend the justice have authority to  take any oath and so the word not actionable and the prohibition be deny
bennet against dean Friday Nov bail bail be put in to cognizant fac by John  Bennet Esq and the declaration be on a recognizance by the name of John Bennet  gentle a attorney of c b and on nul tiel record of the recognizance by John  Bennet Esq per curian this be all one name and no failure for the court take  no notice of heraldry here
bennet against king in avowry for fealty c statute of Timitations no plea  Anderson replevin and avow upon tenure by fealty rend and suit of court  plaintiff confess the tenure but plead that the avowant nor none of his group  of musical notes stors be seize of the say service or any of they within year  the defendant demurrer and bad judgement for fealty homage and such casual  service which peradventure may not happen in year be not within the statute h  of Timitations accord to bevel case   c
bennet against PHILKINS ante return in debt the condition be for appearance of  one Kingwell the defendant plead the statute h cap and that he be in custody  by a warrant of a writ rest Friday post oct Purific the plaintiff reply that  king be take by a warrant on a writ rest Saturday post oct Purific and not by  any writ rest on Friday to which the defendant rejoin that he be in custody by  virtue of a writ rest Friday post oct Purific without hoc that he be take by  any writ rest Sab post oct Purific c to which the plaintiff demurrer be a  traverse upon a traverse and the matter but h inducement and the demand be  just and the fact plead in bar that he be take on a writ rest on Friday which  if faux the plaintiff shall recover and have no other remedy but to traverse  it and replevin raze such traverse may be take by a non as here mich car  Oldham against west in a replevin the plead be this that the property be in  the plaintiff and not in the avowant and the avowant rejoin that the property  be in he and not in the plaintiff which be hold here a traverse upon a  traverse Jones pro plaintiff this be no traverse upon a traverse especial in  propriety for the bare negation before be no traverse though it may be ground  of one also issue shall have be take in the replication therefore conclude hoc  a preparation commit the first fault Twisden conceive all the plead good and  there can be no traverse in the repeat that will make a end but in the  rejoinder it do which Windham agree so Moreton and judgement pro defendant but  the court give leave to discontinue Keble er p
bennet against sampson east geo two prac ring barn S c Writ quash be test out  of term cook a motion to quash a capias ad to answer because the writ be test  the that of February be no day in bank a rule nisi be grant and on show cause  the writ be order to be quash
bennet against sampson easter geo the capias ad to answer be direct to the  sheriff singular of London test February which be the day after the end of  last Hilary term urlin move to quash it allege defendant have no other remedy  to take advantage thereof because he can have oyer of the writ no will it  appear upon the record in case of a writ of error court make a rule to show  cause which be afterward make absolute on hear chapel for plaintiff this writ  bear testae in vacation be void
bennet against skinner idem against sydenham mich geo two barn S c what proof  of defendant be a visible person necessary to set aside a outlawry on a motion  to set aside a outlawry the court hold that the defendant own affidavit of his  be a visible person without a like affidavit by his neighbour be not a  sufficient foundation to set aside a outlawry cook c p er p
bennet against well trial den pray a procedendo to Canterbury in a replevin  because assize be seldom there be a county of it self and per curian it be  deny albeit no remedy without it for the rend charge avow for
bennet against WINBERY c Thursday Nov winnington pray prohibition to the  chamberlain of Chester on bill in equity upon a indebitatus assumpsit on  subscription of several person in several schedule one whereof be only produce  the court will not grant prohibition else they will the prayer be not bare to  discover but to pay the money but adjornatur
bennet and bennet hill and car two rot notice debt on article to surrender the  copyhold or pay on refusal to come to the court the action be lie in London  and affirm notice there of a court in Puddimore yet refuse the defendant plead  that Puddimore be mile off and that he have not sufficient notice the  surrender be the same day to which the plaintiff reply that he have sufficient  notice to which the defendant demurrer and the court conceive the notice  insufficient and the replication be a departure be tie up to a day the day and  place be not general material on not guilty but here the plea be tie up to a  time so in trespass if the release be plead to the second of may the plaintiff  must answer to it in trespass the first of may albeit general the day be not  material in tres pass in evidence but in plead it be and the court give leave  to discontinue
bennet and other v button and other Dec sequestration make out follow the  title of the order for the sergeant at arm and the commission of rebellion the  title of which be mistake the mistake order to be rectify the defendant be in  contempt to a sequestration for want of his answer find on a commission of  rebellion and return of the sergeant at dickens arm non be invention he put in  his answer after which a mistake be discover that the commission of rebellion  be endorse at the suit of Bennet plaintiff only and so enter and the order for  the sergeant at arm be likewise so entitle and enter but the attachment and  the attachment with proclamation be endorse at the suit of Bennet and other  plaintiff upon application to rectify the mistake Lord Hardwicke c say the  defendant have acquiesce by put in his answer and the first process be make  out right he will order it which he accord do Mews dig practice a XXII b
bennet and the hundred OF hartford mich banc sup evidence by one of the jury  to the rest evidence examination where a hundred shall be charge for a robbery  or where not in a trial at bar between the inhabitant of Hartford and Bennet a  carrier upon a action brouabt against they upon the statute of Winchester for  a robbery style report er p commit within that hundred upon his servant it be  say by the court that if either of the party to a trial desire that a juror  may give evidence of something of his own knowledge to the rest of the juror  that the court will examine he open in court upon his oath and he ought not to  be examine in private by his companion and it be also say that if a robbery be  do in twilight the hundred shall not be charge but if it be do by clear day  light whether it be before sun rise or after soil set it be all one for the  hundred shall be charge in both case
bennet and thorn ante pl bail in trespass the defendant justify by process as  baily of inferior court on plaint by Coleman against pierce for who the  plaintiff be bail and by custom on nonpayment by the principal plaintiff  become facias go against the plaintiff and pierce to which the plaintiff  demurrer because the custom be void and so the process be void and not Keble  only erroneous the court conceive it be erroneous enough and in superior court  be the become facias without any recognizance of bail or void as this be by  misnomer it will be sufficient for the officer to justify the execution but  upon a foreign attachment which be use to be plead though late be give in  evidence if the custom be not precise pursue its void so here the custom not  warrant the issue of such process its void for against one that be no bail and  against bail without custom be all one and process out of the inferior court  without a plaint be void and officer kill thereby be murder in he et  adjornatur
bennet and thorn bail the custom be only to become a pledge and that if the  defendant pay not the debt the bail will its sufficient to say come to pledge  on roll roll to excuse the officer be only orderable which the court agree but  have not the custom be pursue where void it will not excuse but here the set  forth the special recognizance Keble which be void yet show what pledge be  require which be not pursue come to pledge general be only for appearance  whereas this be to pay the debt or render the body also the mayor act of take  recognizance can excuse unless there be such a recognizance on record which be  not and in Piers and Deavon hill car not allege a plaint be adjudge trespass  in the officer and judgement for the plaintiff nisi
Bennet v Davis equity case abridge er I S devise land to his daughter be a  feme covert for her separate use exclusive of her husband and that he shall  not be tenant by the courtesy nor have these land for his life in case he  survive his wife but that they shall upon her death go to her heir but I S  appoint no trustee I S die and then the husband become a bankrupt the devise  premise shall not be subject to the bankruptcy for as the testator have a  power to devise the premise to trustee for the separate use of the wife equity  will supply the want of they and make the husband trustee and the assignee be  decree by the master of the roll to join in a conveyance for the separate use  of the wife mich Bennet and Davis will Rep
bennet v loggan eoden die term affidavit read veryfying the bill to get  injunction in order to get a injunction Mr ware produce a affidavit veryfying  the allegation of the bill which be admit to be read
bennet vers purcell Intr mic I Ann b r rot plead post vol p in a action by  bill if the plaintiff give the defendant one addition and he plead a  misprision of addition the plaintiff may reply that he have by reputation the  addition mention in the bill in case upon several promise bring against the  defendant by the name of Tobias Purcell armiger the defendant vide Mod a plead  in abatement that Tobias Purcell versus who billa present be per nomen tobiae  Purcell armor bearer be a gentleman and not esquire the plaintiff reply that  the defendant habitus et think over to be as well a esquire as a gentleman and  then he go on with a long history that he be a esquire tam ration rank of  oneself et parentelae send especially dignissimae occupation c to which the  defendant demurrer and Mr Broderick for the defendant argue that the plaintiff  ought to have reply positive that the defendant be a esquire and not a  gentleman and that the allege it with a habitus et think over to be be not  good because the addition ought to be the true addition and not maintain with  a habitus et think over c only and Powell justice seem to be of that opinion  but holt chief justice hold that in these case the addition be only a  description of the person and common reputation be sufficient for it the suit  be by bill but it will have be otherwise upon original upon which process of  outlawry lie because the statute of I h S require a addition in such case and  judgement be give that the defendant answer over
bennet versus gandy bargain and sale nothing passes before enrolment I show S  c Danv pl in ejectment bring by the assignee of commissioner of bankrupt upon  the bankruptcy of alderman Backwell of London in which these assignee be  lessors of the plaintiff in ejectment and a special verdict be find which be  now to be argue the attorneygeneral Trevor interrupt the argue it for that the  verdict have abate the declaration for it appear by the verdict that the  demise to the plaintiff upon which this ejectment be bring be make by the  assignee of the bankrupt before the enrolment of the bargain and sale by which  the commissioner have assign the land to the lessors of the plaintiff and  though the enrolment Carthew of a deed shall relate to the delivery of the  same deed to avoid mesne encumbrance yet every bargain and sale before  enrolment be void and can be make good by any relation because the bargainee  have no estate before enrolment and if so he can not grant any estate and here  it appear that the lessors of the plaintiff have not any title at the time of  the demise upon which the plaintiff declare and the court hold this to be a  fatal exception and thereupon the argue this cause be reject then the court be  move for leave to amend the declaration by alter the time of the demise send  non allocatur for if the time be alter this will make it a new demise I Bulst  roll Rep Edward cro arid Leon cro raym side Rep Spencer S case Carthew er p
bennet versus preston mich W m B R Mod S C false Latin abate not a appeal  indeed for quidam vide lill   b   a cro et pl in a appeal of murder the  declaration be that at Clapham in come Surr to come predicti Johannes indeed  Daniel Stokely modus defunct and upon demurrer the court hold that this  videlicet indeed be admit to be false Latin will not abate the bill or  declaration for it do not at commonlaw and rely upon near be case     Leon
bennet versus talbot hill W salk Mod trespass for enter and hunt in ground the  defendant be a inferior tradesman contra peace dom king contra form to cause  to stand c it be here object that contra form to cause to stand go to the  whole declaration wherein one of the trespass be not against any statute holt  KB holt c j if a Act of parliament deprive a man of any benefit he have before  at commonlaw or increase a penalty in such case if one declare upon the  statute and do not bring himself within it and conclude contra form to cause  to stand pra dict it be nought but if there be no Act of parliament at all and  the plaintiff conclude contra form to cause to stand it be only surplusage the  question be now how the plaintiff shall declare in this case in ibis count  several trespass be allege the last of which be only within the statute and  the conclusion be contra form to cause to stand though here in a grammatical  construction it go to the whole declaration yet in law it shall go but to the  hunt and therefore why may we not apply it only to the Iatter part and reject  it as to the rest for surplusage as be do in a indictment in Harwoods case  afterward it be move again the court be of opinion that where a statute make a  offence the conclusion must be contra form to cause to stand but this be a  offence before the make of the Act and therefore the declaration be well  enough judgement wall give for the plaintiff
bennet versus talbot hill will B R ld raym S C comens S c Carth Bennet versus  Talboys Mod declaration conclude contra form to cause to stand be well enough  though some of the matter be not within the stat comb S C case B R holt  trespass for enter his close and tread down his grass and corn and hunt there  the defendant be a inferior tradesman videlicet a clothier contra peace domini  king contra form to cause to stand ind to will after verdict pro quer it be  object in arrest of judgement that contra form to cause to stand go to the  whole declaration wherein several of the trespass contain be not contrary to  any statute for the statute W m do only increase cost holt c j if a Act of  parliament increase a penalty or deprive a man of a benefit he have before at  commonlaw in such case if one declare upon the statute and do not bring  himself within the statute and conclude contra form to cause to stand predict  it be nought this be Penhallows case cro but if there be no Act of parliament  at all and the plaintiff conclude contra form satuti predict it be only  surplusage this be ware be case vent here a Act give a increase of cost and in  that only restore the commonlaw which be take away by the stat car the  question be now how the plaintiff shall declare in this case in this count  several trespass be allege the last whereof be only within the statute and the  conclusion of the count be contra formm to cause to stand which though in  grammatical construction it go to the whole count yet in law it only go to the  hunt and therefore why may we not apply it only to the latter part and reject  it as to the rest Salkeld for surplusage as be do in a indictment in Harwoods  case all accord the court hold that contra form to cause to stand shall only  be apply to the latter part which be real against the statute and that see the  hunt and break can not be separate the plaintiff shall have his cost accord to  the new statute judgement for the plaintiff
bennet versus Talboys salk SC where the conclusion of a declaration contra  form to cause to stand be good where not Mod SC comb SC Danv p cro vent Allen  trespass for break his close tread his grass foot ambulando and eat his grass  with cattle mention in the declaration nor de eastern that the defendant hunt  in the say close be a inferior tradesman videlicet a clothier alian irregular  c contra peace speech dom Reg nunc c contra form to cause to stand in  hujusmodi grammatical case edit to will after a verdict for the plaintiff and  d damage give by the jury on the trial at Sarum assize it be move in arrest of  judgement that the conclusion of this declaration videlicet contra form to  cause to stand go to the whole whereas the first part of the declaration be  for a trespass at commonlaw and not ground on any statute whatsoever and after  several debate it be rule pasch Willi that the plaintiff shall quaere if the  defendant bad admit a bare possession in the plaintiff whether that will have  be colour sufficient it be but a tortuous possession only cap cap Inst Inst    Ent a dyer f n b Carthew er p have his judgement for per curian these word  contra form to cause to stand shall be apply to that part of the trespass  which be ground on the new statute against hunt by inferior tradesman which  give full cost though the damage be under forty shilling Carthew et per holt  Ch justice it be sufficient to lie in the declaration that the defendant hunt  in the plaintiff ground without conclude contra form to cause to stand for  that shall come in evidence
bennet versus WESTBECK whether tenant for life in remainder may surrender  without deed the case be thus tenant for life remainder for life reversion in  fee he in remainder for life give his deed of demise with the assent of the  first tenant for life upon the land to a stranger in the absence of the lessor  and say that he surrender to he in reversion and it be say that this surrender  be without deed be not good to he who be absent and to confirm it the case be  put out of h where Montague chief justice say that if a feoff be make to four  and livery be make to one in the absence of the other but in name of all if it  be by deed this shall enure to all but if it be without deed then only to he  to who the livery be make so here this surrender do not enure to he in the  reversion be absent but non allocatur for the sole point now in question be  whether he in remainder for life can surrender without deed and as to it this  rule be take videlicet that that which can commence without deed can be grant  without deed as a rend reversion common advowson c as h h Phil mark ass pl but  in this case this take effect by livery and not by deed and therefore may be  determine without deed Montague and Haughton agree that it may be surrender  without deed because it have its beginning without deed but it can not be  grant over without deed Popham Doderidge justice say that it can not be  surrender without deed but he say that tenant in possession may or tenant for  life and he in remainder together may surrender to he in the reversion but  this shall enure as two several surrender first of he in remainder to the  tenant for life and then by the tenant for life to he in the reversion crook  justice agree with Doderidge for the estate of he in possession be a estoppel  to the surrender so that it can not be surrender without deed the same term in  the same court
bennet who tam c versus smith Monday that November non pro obtain against a  common informer not set aside the court refuse to set aside a non pro regular  obtain by the defendant against the plaintiff who be only a common informer  who sue for a penalty of upon the statute of usury though the plaintiff offer  to pay the cost of set it aside for though Lord Mansfield seem to think that  burrow the case may perhaps have bear a different consideration in case the  plaintiff have be the party real injure and have sue in order to come at  justice and reparation for such real injury yet not only his lordship himself  but the whole court now present be clear and unanimous that where a mere  common informer who sue for punishment only have be guilty of a slip or  mistake which put he out of court and entitle the defendant to enter a non pro  against he they will not exercise their discretionary power in set aside this  non pro thus regular obtain and restore the mere common informer to a  opportunity of proceed for the sake of punishment only and they distinguish  the present case from case of amendment which indeed the court will not  scruple to make even in case of who tam action where there be any thing to  amend by and which they have frequent do in some instance that be mention or  at least hint at as in particular the give leave to change the county in a who  tam action on Mr Norton motion not many term ago
Bennett v Sydenham barn er Bennett against sydenham the same against skinner  mich geo baker attorney for plaintiff motion by Eyre and draper for defendant  to reverse outlawry on common enclosed space to break in pieces at plaintiff  expense on affidavit of defendant public appearance and deal swear by  themselves only per draper Act to prevent vexatious arrest direct process to  be serve where no affidavit be make of the debt and a outlawry can only be  support by process to arrest it appear that plaintiff demand on defendant  Sydenham be no more than S d and on defendant Skinner S wright for plaintiff  urge that where defendant can be come at to be personal serve with process  plaintiff have no remedy but a outlawry per cur let the rule be enlarge till  next term that baker plaintiff attorney may in the mean time make satisfaction  to the party
Bennett v walker and Colebrook August saint where a purchaser without notice  have convey to a purchaser with notice the latter purchaser may plead that the  first purchase be without notice so Brandlyn v Ord post Lowther v Carlton atk  Macqueen v Farquhar Ves this be a bill for the discovery of defendant title to  the advowson of Lymington the defendant walker plead that he purchase from the  defendant Colebrook and that Colebrook be a purchaser without notice but admit  that west tempt Hardwicke he have himself notice of the claim before the  conveyance be complete Mr Floyer Mr Hamilton and Mr clarke in support of the  plea cite Lowther v Carleton in person Talbot that April and atk Harrison v  forth Prec Ch in which Lord summer hold that a purchaser with notice may avail  himself of a prior purchaser without notice for otherwise a innocent purchaser  may be deprive of the benefit of ever sell his estate Lord chancellor where a  purchaser without notice have convey to a purchaser with notice the latter  purchaser may plead that the first purchase be without notice the plea be  order to stand for a answer with liberty to except save the benefit to the  hear of the cause this case be take from Lord hardwicke notebook west tempt  Hardwicke er p
Bennett vers Verdon in a indebitatus assumpsit the plaintiff way state that  the defendant be indebt to he in so much foreign money without show its value  in English at least no objection can be take on this account after a verdict a  man can sue in his own right and as executor in the same action Indebitatus  assumpsit for that that the defendant be indebt to the plaintiff in of money  Hispaniolae assumpsit to pay it c up he non assumpsit plead the verdict be for  the plaintiff and Mr Branthwaite move in arrest of judgement that the  plaintiff ought to have say ad valor c it be foreign coin for the defendant  can be indebt in foreign coin no more than in hog c say non allocatur for a  man may be indebt in bog c but in such case the action must be bring in the to  hold off only not in the debet and to hold off far there be a verdict here and  therefore all the court hold it good but afterward judgement be arrest because  the plaintiff bring this action for money due to himself in his own right and  also for another sum in another count due to he as executor to I S which can  be join
Benning v dowce exemption from tithe how to be lie this be a bill for tithe  the defendant insist that the land where c be part of the homestall which be  part of the bishop of London palace and therefore exempt from payment of tithe  but do not lie it personal in the bishop and this be allow by Lord chief baron  bury and baron price against page to be well enough because this exemption go  along with the land although it will have be better lie by way of formal  prescription as at law that the bishop for himself and his tenant have time  out of mind c and as to land belong to a monastery they must set forth how the  prescription be but where the land itself be exempt it be discharge in  whatever hand it come and by the opinion of two baron against one absent  Montague the bill be dismiss Bunbury de term S michaelis
Bennington vers GOODTITLE ejectment lie for a beastgate andr SC ante on error  in ejectment it be hold to lie for a beastgate which be a term know in Suffolk  and import land and common for one beast Metcalfe v row Cas tempt hard and the  judgement be affirm
BENNOYER versus brace Trin W case W holt c j this case stand for the  resolution of the court trespass against four verdict and judgement for the  plaintiff against four all four bring a writ of error after judgement give one  of they die before the record certify and the plaintiff take out a capias ad  satisfaciend against the survivor whereon two question have be be it whether  if judgement he have against two defendant and one die execution may he have  against the survivor without a to know fac which we hold it may suppose it to  be within the year holt KB because there be no change of the record at all and  it shall not be intend there be a release to the party decease dly whether in  this case when the writ of error abate by the death of one of the plaintiff in  error execution may be take out against the rest without apprise the court  thereof by the writ of error the hand of the court be tie up so that they  ought not to award execution till they be satisfy their hand be lose now here  be a execution without make this matter appear to the court for which reason  it go out erroneous and therefore let supersedeas go because ernanavit  improvident c see abatement ejectment and error servant
bens against king ante arbitrement Cr pl debt upon a bind for performance of a  award which per Jones who demurrer for the defendant be void because it be not  final but contingent and conditional if one party be not discharge by the Act  of oblivion car he be to pay the plaintiff upon the day of payment be to make  a general release which be a discharge of the bind it self but by finch for  the plaintiff the money be Payable at certain day h Elizabeth Popham Sherly  against Richardson and therefore the proviso be void Hub Worli against beck  but the award good to the that it be mutual and the submission bind not  release be July the award septemb Payable at first feast after and on fever  follow Keble the release not to be give till after the last day of payment  Allen for the defendant that the award appear that it be whole to be perform  before the release be to be be good but this be not so for release be to be  make February whether payment be make or no Capel against Allen this be not a  proviso but the body of the award it self which be to release upon payment  which per curian be void as if it have be to pay if it be not pardon winch  against sander Cr and by Twisden accord to Hutton a release to the time of the  arbitrament be good if nothing appear contrary finch perceive the opinion of  the court against he pray to discontinue but the court conceive it fruitless  be in debt upon a bind judgement for the defendant
bens vers parre mariner may sue for their wage in the court of admiralty  notwithstanding they let themselves by a write contract make at land vide ante  salk pl Str burr lev sir James Montague move for a prohibition to a suit in  the admiralty for seaman wage upon a suggestion that the contract be make by  deed at land but upon read the suggestion it appear to be general that the  contract be make at land then the court direct he to mend his suggestion and  make it that it be by deed and he amend it and make it per scribe but the  court hold that thatVide post a be not sufficient for it may be by write and  yet not by deed and if it be so that will not alter the case for  notwithstanding the write it be but a parole contract but sir James Montague  urge that it be a special agreement but that the court hold do not draw it  from the Admiraltys jurisdiction and the motion be deny
BENSKIN against French hill car Monday may escape Siderf pl in action upon the  case the plaintiff count on take of one I p by a on alias capias die and have  of her in the house of the defendant the defendant in consideration a the  bailiff will permit her to remain there until the next morning promise to  deliver her again the next morning into his custody which by wile for the  defendant in arrest of judgement be against law suppose a escape to be permit  Jones for the plaintiff the assent of the plaintiff to this agreement do make  the promise sufficient although it be a escape so whither it be intend that  the bailiff shall keep her in custody or let her escape its good enough  especial by Allen be a promise make to the bailiff on the behalf of the  plaintiff and if it have be a insufficient consideration which be scan at the  trial it may have amount to non assumpsit and therefore after verdict this  shall not be intend a escape but that accord to law she remain in the house in  custody of the bailiff Twisden cite the case where sir John Lenthall suffer  one by assent to go out of prison and the plaintiff bring the action and hold  it will not lie but this case may be other no escape be here suppose and by  Windham by law the bailiff ought not to hurry any immediate away to the prison  and he may call any other person in aid and so may commit the prisoner to they  and per curian for ought appear here the bailiff be present all the while and  so no escape in who house whoever the prisoner be hut and the promise to  deliver her in custody be no more then that he will see the party shall not  escape thence and if she id escape it shall have be find special judgement for  the plaintiff nisi
bensley v bensley S c atk sub nom Beasley v Beasley joint commission against  two partner do not abate by the death of one but if one be dead at the time of  take out the commission it be void Lord chancellor where there be a joint  commission against two partner they must be each find bankrupt and though one  of they shall die the commission may still go on but if one of the joint  trader be dead at the time of take out the commission it abate and be absolute  void what Lord Hardwicke be state to have say in this case be take from atkins  it do not appear in Lord hardwicke notebook
Benson against hem trinity geo plaintiff original demand be S d defendant give  notice to set off but take no advantage under it prove on the trial payment in  part which reduce the debt to S d and that sum the jury give plaintiff in  damage defendant obtain a rule to show cause why he shall not have leave to  enter a suggestion on the roll pursuant barn to the statute W m set up court  of conscience in Bristol and Gloucester that the party be both inhabitant of  Gloucester and the debt recover under S plaintiff counsel quote a case in b r  pit against carpenter Trinity Geo where a cross demand of S have be prove by  way of setoff and thereby plaintiff original debt of S be reduce to S d after  the benefit of say setoff the court deny leave to defendant to enter  suggestion this court be of the same opinion as the court of king bench the  demand in the case quote be reduce by defendant act it be not know to  plaintiff at the time of bring his action whether defendant will take  advantage of a setoff or not the inferior court have no jurisdiction for a  debt above S but this case differ from that quote here no setoff be use but  payment prove under the non assumpsit the original debt which be the cause of  action appear to be no more than S d defendant submit to the jurisdiction of  this court do not take away his remedy after verdict he now come primo  instanter the suggestion may be traverse as to inhabitancy rule for leave to  enter suggestion absolute the London court of conscience Act James chap be a  good statute and though this Act relate to Bristol and Gloucester be  inaccurate pen after a good precedent yet the court be bind by it Skinner for  plaintiff will and draper for defendant barn er p
Benson against hudson tail error of a judgement in Lancaster in avowry for  rentcharge grant by mosely for portion of a daughter to be pay on failer of  issue male at such a time and on other contingent in bar of which the  plaintiff in the replevin plead a recovery by the issue male of sir Edward m  before be die without issue male to which the avowant reply that before the  recovery he make a lease for year which be yet in be to which the plaintiff  demurrer and whether this fine and recovery by the issue entail bar this rend  grant out of the reversion or not be the question et adjornatur
Benson against SANKERIDGE in a assumpsit upon a accuse computaveri the  plaintiff declare that he account for diverse sum of money to he due and that  the defendant be find in arrear as much as he assume to pay and do not express  for what the sum be due and by Richardson therefore nought for such a account  for debt upon a obligation in specialty it be void c Hutton if he declare that  the defendant be hetley ing indebt in to visit containing ten each allow to  grow long assume it be void without show for what but here the action be  ground upon the account Richardson it ought to be express in general the debt  be for ware sell c but otherwise if the account be for debt upon a obligation  or specialty he recover double for the specialty remain notwithstanding the  recovery in the assumpsit Hutton we can think that it be for any thing but  such thing which lie in account which Harvey agree but the court command to  search precedent
Benson against Welby ante sheriff in dell Fitzherbert all the declaration be  but inducement when the conclusion be where in fact he have not the body at  the day and that be the main all so the declaration may consist and yet not  actionable but have the plaintiff rely on the escape per curian the action  will lie and the defendant must plead the statute and so he must in debt on  obligation against he but in action sur case it may be give in evidence and  the court incline strong pro defendant but adjornatur there be another clause  of the same nature depend post
Benson against Welby trin car rot sheriff in dell Fitzherbert this be the same  case verbatim as Parker and Welby ante and per curian for not plead the  statute judgement pro plaintiff and the like in another case special enter  that judgement be give for not plead the statute Keble er p
Benson and hudson arm remainder hale Ch just on white and Geerish case say on  gift in tail of knight service and rend the recovery extinguiseth the tenure  but not the rend but if it be on condition it be go unless it be annex to the  rend but then both be go but tail to I S so long as the tree stand the  remainder over if recovery be before the contingent happen its destroy for the  recovery make the purchaser in continue the estate tail which Twisden c agree  but if the estate tail be spend after this recovery rend grant by the tenant  in tail be go as dower determine by tenant in tail die without issue so  reservation all fall with the original estate but the reversion in fee be not  Chargeable till the remainder in tail be spend
Benson and scott copyhold surrendees title be before admittance I e by the  surrender ejectment for copyhold land the jury find the custom to make  surrender by two customary tenant c that Samuel scot do so surrender to the  use of Barbara callard and her heir and this be present in the life of same  scot at the Comberbach next court but scot die before admittance then b c be  admit and afterward Martha the widow of same scot be admit they find the  custom of frank bank within the manor and that Martha continue a widow and  conclude general c r web pro quer who claim as assignee of callard by the  construction of this custom the widow be to enjoy it in the same manner as the  husband shall have do and not otherwise cro fair S case lashmore S case here  by relation the husband do not die seize Inst b the estate be bind by relation  from the surrender bull roll roswell and Welsh roll Rep royden and malster  indeed there be a heriot due by the death of the surrendror but that be a  profit fall from his estate this differ from conveyance at commonlaw and more  like those by way of use though sometime relation bold place even in commonlaw  conveyance Inst b Comberbach er p levinz pro to ward off cite cro berry versus  green and Yelv which be not much material he say the defendant S title be  inchoate by the marriage and consummate by the death of the husband before  admittance of the surrendere but the Ch I say the title do not commence by the  marriage for then it can not be bar but this only by the die seize and it be  adjudge for the plaintiff without much difficulty note here the mortgagee have  assign to the heir and the court be of opinion obiter that the widow pay the  mortgagemoney may be relieve in equity though it be not usual to grant a  attachment upon not return a first writ of mandamus yet it may be do if the  court see cause as in case of a rank and wilful disobedience and obstruction  of justice
Benson v Watkins Feb modus where too rank defendant be decree to account for  tithe in kind post pl bill by a impropriate rector for tithe defendant insist  upon several modus videlicet five shilling per acre for wheat and rye four  shilling per acre for summer corn three shilling per acre for meadow c the  court disallow these modus and decree the defendant to account they be too  rank and too near the value of the land especial when these modus be suppose  to commence when the land be at a much less value and the money at a much  great it be say in this case that the only difference between a modus and a  composition be that the first be time out of mind and the last only a late  agreement all the garden ground in England shall pay tithe for different crop  turnip when they be pull ought to pay tithe though never so often sow and  though upon the same land tithe of aftermoath shall be pay but not tithe of  afterpasture unless by custom but quaere de less point darrein Bunbury de term  paschae
Benson vers derby a defendant may plead misnomer in abatement after put in  bail by the name whereby he be sue the defendant be a attorney and sue by the  name of Thomas Derby put in bail by that name and afterward plead in abatement  that his name be John Derby and it be move that this plea may be reject  because it be contrary to what he have admit by put in of bail by the name of  Thomas Derby but per holt chief justice the put in of bail be the act of the  bail and therefore will not estop the defendant and therefore the motion be  deny Lord Raymond mich term will B R sir John holt chief justice sir Thomas  Rokeby sir John Turton sir Samuel Eyre justice memorandum this term Mr  sergeant Hatsel be make baron of the exchequer in the room of sir John  blencowe remove into the common plea
Benson versus Hodson pasch car Intr hill car rot remainder I lev Mod keb a  tenant for life the remainder to the use of b in tail remainder to c in tail  remainder to the heir of the defendant provide that a shall have power to make  lease for year in possession reversion or contingency a make a lease for year  to commence after the death of b without issue by hale chief justice b may bar  this lease by a common recovery although this arise precedent to the  estatetail because it be in continuance of the estate of b
Benson versus offley all exception to a appeal of murder appeal by the wife  for the murder of her husband versus OffLev as principal and lipton and  another as abettor on non cul plead the jury find that lipton give the stroke  and that OffLev be aid c and the question in arrest of judgement be whether  this be a good verdict Plowd be cite that it be so in the case of a indictment    Markally S case Thompson contra he agree the case of a indictment but it be  otherwise in a appeal because at the suit of the party and here the  declaration be falsify by the verdict and therefore she can it have judgement  c I this may as well be allege in case of a indictment and the court incline  to give judgement but it be adjourn on other exception in a action of the case  for the defendant plead the statute of limitation but mistake the plaintiff  name for the defendant and upon motion it be grant that he may amend if he  will swear that he do not owe the debt move to amend a information of perjury  after plea plead but it be deny per curian
Benson versus scot Pas W m B R Carth Mod lev admittance relate to surrender  and surrendees title begin from thence Inst b Bulst cro cro car comb skin in  ejectment special verdict be find videlicet a custom that the tenant of the  manor have a mind to alien may surrender into the hand of two copyholder c  that scot be a copyholder in fee do surrender c to the use of the plaintiff in  fee and die leave his wife who claim her freebank by the custom and at Salkeld  er p the next court the surrender be present and thereupon the plaintiff admit  and the question be whether the surrendee or the wife for her frankbank shall  have these land it be adjudge for the plaintiff for the wife title do not  commence till after the death of the husband and then only to those land of  which he die seize but the plaintiff title begin by the surrender for the  admittance relate to that a and that the case of two jointtenants Inst b rule  this case a r send for burr r also burr that the widow of a surrendee who die  before admittance be entitle to free bench vide will t r
Bentley against hoar sufficiency of the bail take by the sheriff be not  traversable S c I side case for a escape on mesne process the defendant plead  that be let the prisoner go on sufficient bail the plaintiff demurrer and it  be argue that the plea be not good because he have lie no venue where he take  the bail and the sufficiency of the bail be traversable but by the court the  sufficiency of the bail take by the sheriff be not traversable for the bail be  only for security of the sheriff to save he against amerciament for by the  stat h he be oblige to let the party to bail by sufficient mainpernors and the  statute be make he shall be let to bail which sheriff have refuse to the  statute provide for the security of the sheriff surety and yet if he take one  surety only it have be ajudged sufficient and Twysden say that it be hold by  roll and Glyn here that the statute h be a general law of to take notice  without plead of it
Bentley against scott and another in replevin easter geo prime for defendant  move for judgement as in case of nonsuit pool for plaintiff endeavour to  distinguish this barn from common case because in replevin defendant may in  the first instance have carry down the record to trial per cur the Act of  parliament have make no distinction
bently and other against leigh in trespass hill Elizabeth rot trin James in  the exchequer the judge affirm a judgement this term between leigh plaintiff  in a writ of error and one Bentley and other defendant and the matter assign  for error be because the trespass be bring in the year Elizabeth for a  trespass make in the Elizabeth and the judgement upon the verdict be against  the defendant and the margin of the roll it be enter quod defendant to take in  hand where it ought to be pardonatur as he pretend for the general pardon  which be in Elizabeth have pardon the fine to the king for the trespass and  this be a thing whereof the judge ought to take notice as it be say by Damport  who be of council with the plaintiff in the error for this word to take in  hand be of course enter in the roll for the king fine which be due by he who  be convict of trespass as it appear by cook lib in sir William Harberts case  and in this case the fine be pardon therefore pardonatur ought to be enter as  it be in Vaughan case cook lib but the judge resolve that of these general  pardon they be not bind to take notice without plead for in regard there be  diverse exception in they the party ought to show that he be none of the party  except as the book be in e but if they will they may take notice thereof  without plead as it seem by Vaughan case and so say the judge in the common  plea this term and so here the judgement be affirm
benton and carpenter full cost in trespass the case be in trespass on the  statute car Herbert c I it be adjudge by all the justice in sergeantsinn that  in all action pro good carry away or in trespass for take a stake out of a  hedge or for tithe take away when sever c there shall be full cost although  but two penny damage lutwych justice contra all man and that he have know it  adjudge both way and that it be contrary to the express word of two statute he  say it have be hold also that a Comberbach cow S eat a mouthful of grass be a  carry away c vide stat Elizabeth confirm d by the statute car per Ch I a  action for S bring by a poor man may be very well bring in this court and it  shall not be adjudge vexatious for it may be a great sum to he lutwych by the  constitution of this court no plea can be hold here which be under S  Adjournatur
BENTONS case a man lease for life and afterward lease for year to commence  after the death of the lessee for life render rend the reversion be grant  tenant for life die lessee for year do not attourn and it seem that the  reversion passes without attornment and he shall have debt or shall avow
benzen vers Jeffries the master of a ship may hypothecate her for necessary  even upon land in the course of the voyage the admiralty be the proper court  to sue in upon a hypothecation motion be make for a prohibition to the court  of admiralty where a suit be prosecute against a ship which the master have  hypothecate for necessary be upon the sea in stress of weather and the  suggestion be that the agreement be make and the money lend upon the land  videlicet in the port of London it be a Venetian vessel which come here by way  of trade and not stress of weather but per holt chief justice the master of  the ship have power to hypothecate it but he can sell it and by the pawn the  ship become liable to condemnation this be resolve in solemn debate in the  case of costard v Lewslie will mark B R comb holt then there be no remedy here  for the hypothecation but by way of contract therefore since the king bench  can do right to the party it will not hinder the admiralty from do they right  for if the king bench allow the hypothecation and yet deny the remedy it will  be a manifest contradiction a action be bring upon the statute Henry cap for  sue in the admiralty upon a hypothecation and it be hold to be out of the  statute in the time of my Lord hale and as to the objection that the contract  be make upon the land and the money pay there it must of necessity be so for  if a man be in distress upon the sea and compel to go into port he must  receive the money there or not at all and if his ship be impair by tempest so  that he be force to borrow money to refit otherwise she will be lose and for  security of this money he pledge his ship since the cause of the pledge arise  upon the sea the suit may well be in the admiralty court but because there be  a precedent where a prohibition in such case have be grant the court grant the  prohibition and Lord Raymond order the plaintiff to declare upon it for the  law seem clear to they as before be say
berchere et all vers colson bail may be put in above without the defendant  consent Tidds prac KB the defendant prevail with Collins and Bevan to become  bail for he to the sheriff in l at the return of the writ they go before a  judge in order to put in bail above and the defendant himself appear and  insist that no bail shall be take the judge refuse to do any thing in the  matter whereupon I move the court that to prevent so palpable a fraud the bail  may be permit to perform the condition of their bind by put in bail and leave  be give so to do the bail be put in before a judge and the next day the bail  take up the defendant and surrender he in discharge of themselves
BEREHOLT v candy Jan officer of revenue ought to be sue in the exchequer for  what they do in the execution of their office post pl and the court will  remove a action commence in the c b against a officer for seizure of a ship  though no information for the ship be yet file here distinguish Adam v  Freemantle ex candy a officer seize coffee on board a ship as if it be intend  to be reland contrary to the condition of the owner bind he also seize the  ship and carry her to a place where he can convenient search her in the  presence of witness the owner of the coffee bring a action against he in banc  king for this seizure but this action be remove upon motion as usual because a  information be actual file for the coffee but a action be bring in common banc  against candy by the owner of the ship it be also move to remove this action  but oppose by the plaintiff because there be no information for the ship and  Bunbury therefore not within the rule but by the opinion of the court officer  belong to the revenue ought to be sue here for what the do in the execution of  their office and although no information for the ship be file yet a seizure be  not examinable in another court and in the action below the stop and seize  must be give in evidence and therefore we will remove the action a information  be try and a verdict for the defendant the informer move for a new trial which  be deny a action be commence in the common plea against the officer for the  seizure and the court be move that it may be remove here but deny because the  officer be now out of court and can have no protection here de term Paschae  may Bunbury er p
Beresford and beddingfield error error of a judgement in lyn that the jury  dainties triati being under oath not say ad reality dicend which per curian be  ill though it be say super sacrament to say it be in the to swear falsely per  quos rei veritas melius to know for to know to be able which per curian be  error judgement reverse in the assumpsit
Beresford S case suit upon the writ de freedom allocandis Mr Beresford as  deputy bailiff of the liberty of tauntondean under the bishop of Winchester  have sue out a writ de freedom allocandis direct to the sheriff of  somersetshire thereby recite quod constat king that his progenitor by several  charter have grant to the bishop of Winton the say liberty with the execution  and return of all writ within the precinct c and that the say bishop have  enjoy the same accord c to this writ the sheriff make this return videlicet  quod non that this only is apparent I that there be any such charter as in the  writ mention beyond that the present bishop of Winton or his predecessor never  enjoy such liberty c and now it be move for a rule on the sheriff to amend  this return but the court will make no rule because it be a extraordinary  course to try the right of Carthew liberty in a action for a false return of a  writ whereas if the plaintiff be aggrieve he may bring a action against the  sheriff for infringe his liberty c
BERISFORD and coal in error come semble bar conclude in abatement to know  facias against tertenants in a to know facias against tertenants one of they  begin his plea in bar quod performance to have non debet and conclude in  abatement holt Ch I say action non affirm the writ so that he can plead in  abatement afterward h judgement be quod respond ouster where one undertake to  name tertenants in the to know facias he shall name they all otherwise where  the to know facias be general to the tertenants Comberbach cro Michael and  cross cro holland and Dantzey sir Barth shower it be plead thus in sand  Jefferson and Moreton cur many entry may be so but this wrong eyres I there  can be a final judgement in this case therefore the judgement seem well enough  but holt say that he ought not to answer till the other tertenants warn and  therefore the judgement ill but the party may have a hearing complaint not to  avoid the extent but for contribution eyres I the book say he can after a to  know to make holt Ch I yes it be the very case in more verey versus Carew and  Gibson Comberbach er p
Berkele versus hansard mich W m B R rot in quare hinder nonsuit after  appearance be peremptory   light a Brownl in a quare hinder against a and b  and the bishop a and b make title and the bishop plead that he claim nothing  but as ordinary the bishop die a come and surmise this upon the roll and pray  the plaintiff may reply upon this a entry be make quod predict quer although  solemnly drive out non go for sale nec be pursue breve suum prd therefore to  look at closely be e breve bishop upon this a writ of error be bring and the  judgement be affirm for it be a nonsuit after appearance which in a quare  hinder be peremptory vide   b h b h b
Berkeley all v welter Nov officer of custom seize two cable one whereof be  only foreign the court refuse to remove the action of trespass from b r a  customhouse officer seize two cable on board a ship after she be clear and  Bunbury er p bring they on shore be not report one of they be a foreign cable  and so forfeit by the stat Geo c the other he will have bring back again to  the ship but the master refuse to receive it unless he can have they both the  owner of the ship bring a action of trespass against the officer for take  fifty thousand pound weight of rope and cordage in b r so I this day move to  remove the action into this court the defendant be a officer of the revenue  act in the execution of his office and the foreign cable be actual condemned  in this court but it not appear but that the action be bring in b r for the  other cable only the court deny the motion
Berkeley v more counsel on both side to attend concern the ratify of a award  where by a order of the that of February last a subpoena be award against the  defendant caryi er p to show cause wherefore a award therein mention shall not  be ratify now Mr Flowerdew of counsel on the defendant behalf inform that the  say award be not make by any order of this court and therefore desire that the  say defendant may not be compel to perform the same it be order that counsel  on both side shall attend the morrow sevennight and caryi then order shall be  take Berkeley mile plaintiff more defendant year Elizabeth
Berkeley vers Howard a certiorari lie to affirm a judgement after in nullo be  erratum barn b r on error of a judgement by default the plaintiff in error  assign the want of a original and warrant of attorney and the defendant  without put he to return certiorar plead in nullo be erratum and on argument  the plaintiff insist that it be a confession of the error and it be agree so  to be but upon application to the court and affidavit that there be be  original and warrant of attorney the court award two certiorar it be in order  to affirm a judgement Meredith v Davies salk Bellew v Scott ante
Berkeley versus pain in a assumpsit in a inferior court the consideration be  that the plaintiff shall solicit a cause in chancery the court reverse the  judgement for want of jurisdiction it have also another fault for it be  defendens in pity to take in hand
Berkes versus man pasch James action of debt bring against the defendant as  administrator of I S the defendant plead full administer the plaintiff reply  that himself have asset and it shall have be that the defendant have asset and  this be move in arrest of judgement but amend by the court be the clerk  misprision only as where it be enter et predict defend similiter and it shall  have be et predict quer similiter and this have be often amend by the court  judgement reverse by writ of error be in the disjunctive
berks wm mason a new trial grant because the judge be dissatisfy with the  verdict upon a rule to show cause why a new trial shall not be have rider ch j  before who the cause be try report that there be evidence on both side but  that the evidence for the party in who favour the verdict be find be so very  slight that the jury ought not in his opinion to have regard it and that the  evidence for the other party be very strong and he conclude with say that he  be dissatisfy with the verdict at a former day when this rule come on it be  say on show cause that if there be evidence on both side a new trial ought not  to be grant and the case of smith v Huggins mich g in this court be rely upon  wherein a new sayer er p trial be refuse although lee ch j report that the  evidence for the plaintiff in who favour the verdict be find be slight and  that he have sum up strong for the defendant the opinion of the court be that  as there be evidence on both side a new trial ought not to be grant the matter  be at that day order to stand over for the chief justice to look into his note  in order to make a full report sayer after the chief justice have make the  above report it be say in support of the rule that if the judge declare  himself to be dissatisfy with the verdict it be the constant practice to grant  a new trial and nothing be say by the council who have show cause at the  former day the rule be make absolute
Bernado and duran how far a master in chancery can make a report ex part till  he have leave give he by the court to do so canc a order of reference have be  make to one of the master to settle what be due upon the balance between the  plaintiff and defendant the defendant give in his charge and take out four  summonss to attend the master and upon the bottom of the two last the master  have writ that he will proceed ex part if the plaintiff will not bring in his  countercharge the plaintiff neglect they all but yet the defendant be so fair  as to tell the master he consent shall be strike off from the account he bring  in as allowance for the countercharge of the plaintiff which he make oath be  all that the plaintiff can set up as a demand against he and the master accord  do allow it and report that upon the balance thus make up there be due to the  defendant however Lord chancellor set this report aside but without cost for  he say the master have no authority to make this report ex part till there be  first obtain a order from the court to do it
bernard against evens contract to retain tithe for the life of the parson SC  raym keb burr Bac Abr Bac Abr in debt for tithe for four year the defendant  plead a agreement between the plaintiff and he that he shall retain the land  discharge of tithe during the life of the plaintiff if he so long continue  parson issue be on the agreement and a verdict for the defendant and judgement  for he after motion in arrest of judgement for although first a lease of tithe  can be without deed and second that it can be a good lease for the uncertainty  as   Litt b and cro hawk v Brogfield Owen hob yet this be only a contract for  retain the tithe it be good accord to cro Honicomb against sweet and by the  whole court judgement be for the defendant
bernard against ewen agreement hetley Cr Leonard pl Leon pl Browill pl Godbolt  pl latch Perkins pl   pl Bulstr pl Bulstr in debt on Edward for not set out  tithe the defendant as Cr Hub plead agreement parole for the tithe with the  parson as long as he shall be parson this be good only for a year though it be  with the party who be a parishioner but in issue on this agreement after  verdict no repleader shall be no more than in issue on payment on single bill  which in it self be not good per Windham justice to which the court accord but  Twisden say if the issue on payment on single bill be find for the defendant  its doubtful if a repleader be not to be award and he doubt whether the  grantee can agree with the grantor of rend that he may retain his rend for  several year which powis who move for repleader conceive can not be good say  adjournatur
bernard against levit Trin banc sup error to reverse a judgement in a action  upon the case Bernard bring a writ of error against levit to reverse a  judgement give against he in the Comn on plea in a action upon the case for  speak these word of he thou Bernard art a base fellow and do kill your first  wife the error assign be that it do not appear in the declaration that the  plaintiff be marry before but the court affirm the judgement and say the  defendant have confess it by join issue non culp upon the word
bernard Powell gentleman administrator of henry Dillingham late of the  university of Oxford decease plaintiff richard he and thomas Adam and other  defendant plea of privilege of the university of Oxford allow the plaintiff as  administrator of Henry Dillingham sue to have a account of his estate which  the defendant have get into their possession on pretence of some debt due to  they from the intestate and by this mean they obstruct the plaintiff to have  satisfaction of a debt just due to he the defendant plead that they be  privilege person and member of the university of Oxford and there resident  which be certify by the chancellor of the say university and demand conusance  of the matter in question for that the same of which the plaintiff have  complain by his bill be only examinable and determinable before he or his  vicechancellor deputy or commissary and not elsewhere the court allow the plea
bernard versus beal word that the plaintiff have two bastard year since a  action upon the case be bring for these word videlicet that the plaintiff have  two bastard year ago upon the report whereof he be in danger to have be  divorce and it be resolve that for defamation there be no remedy but in the  spiritual court if he have no temporal loss thereby and therefore it be not  sufficient to ground a action to say that he be in danger to be divorce but  that he be de facto divorce or that he be to have a presentment in marriage as  it be in whether Davies case coke lib the same term in the same court
bernes and his wife against Richard in dower counterplea of view that the  husband alien to the tenant but do not say feoffavit c ante lev dower unde  nothing to have the tenant demand the view the demandant counterpleads for  that her husband alienate the tenement aforesaid to the tenant hoc c the  demandant demurrer general and now it be argue by Pemberton that the  counterplea be not good for she ought to have plead Jeoffavit for by to make  strange it do not appear what estate be alien and even a lease for year be a  alienation but the court on the contrary hold that a alienation imply his  whole estate and the stat Edward ousts the tenant from the view of land which  the husband alien to the tenant or any of his ancestor so that the plea here  be in the very word of the statute and good and judgement be quod to answer  ouster
BERNING versus FOLLAT mid Lien debt upon a obligation condition to pay money  upon the plaintiff deliver over to the defendant some receipt which will  effect infallible cure of the pox and other disease the defendant plead that  the plaintiff do not deliver over the say receipt which plea upon demurrer be  raled nought and judgement seem to be for the plaintiff and then a exception  be start that the action be bring in Middlesex and the bind itself as appear  upon the record be date in London and coke upon Littleton a the put of a place  for the date of the deed be disadvantageous to the feoff for be in general he  may allege the deed to be make where he will by which be to be collect that if  the place be add he can allege it to be make in any other place than where it  be allege et adjournaturr vide bro debt faits obligation e Raymond sir t term  pasch car b r
BERRIMAN against gilbert and his wife easter geo the debt be contract by the  woman while sole and plaintiff have recover judgement both husband and wife be  take in execution Eyre move to discharge the wife and cite mile against  William Trin Ann in b r where it be say arguendo though it be not the point in  question that the wife can be take in execution but the court hold otherwise  and discharge the rule on mesne process the woman may perhaps have be  discharge on a common appearance but no instance can be show where she have be  discharge from a execution wright for plaintiff
Berrington versus Parkhurst mich Geo two b r vide post case amendment of issue  in ejectment Mr r and Mr f move to show Cause this be a rule to amend a  declaration in ejectment by alter the county and lie the demise in buck  whereas W Kelynge now it be for tithe in Middlesex this amendment go to the  very substance and Jett of the action and the defendant have plead to the  demise as lie in the declaration there be a difference between action in  ejectment and all other case and the court will never suffer the plaintiff in  ejectment to amend his declaration Mr a counsel content the court have  frequent suffer the plaintiff to amend his declaration where the mistake have  be more material in assumpsit by the executor of the duke of Marlborough the  court give the plaintiff leave to amend by lie the assumpsit as a promise make  to they whereas before it be lie as a promise make to the duke himself so  where the word felon have be omit the court have give leave to amend after  issue join and the Cause be actual carry down to trial ejectment be the  creature of the court and therefore may take great liberty in rectify these  mistake in this case the declaration which be deliver in the county be right  it be the declaration in the Copy of the issue which be wrong cur we never  suffer declaration in ejectment to be amend where it alter the W Kelynge er p  substance of the action but if the declaration deliver in the country be right  the Copy of the issue may be amend by it but here the rule be only to amend  the declaration and you can amend the Copy of the issue by this rule and  therefore the rule must be discharge
berry against bishop sheriff in debt the defendant plead the statute of  sheriff and that it be for ease and favour and not for a just debt the  plaintiff say it be for a just debt without hoc that it be for ease and favour  to which the defendant rejoin special that it be for ease and favour to which  the plaintiff demurrer not but after that the rejoinder be set aside and this  in vacation by judge raynsford the plaintiff enter judgement for not join on  the issue tender by the plaintiff and per curian it be affirm for per curian  when issue be offer and rule give the other party must join and can depart to  any new matter
berry against wheeler Siderf pl execution Maynard for the defendant in  ejectment in evidence except to a extent under which the plaintiff claim  because after execution by become facias of part elegit be for the whole  without mention any thing levy by the former elegit which recite the to know  facias but be return nothing but by Allen nothing here appear but a award on  the roll of elegit and a sheriff non to cause to go breve after another be  take out which be file the party have no remedy but by and quer no such  recital of the to know facias be in this second elegit but the defendant  suggestion not appear on record Maynard waive it he object that it appear that  more then a moiety be extend for its say that the defendant be seize of a  rectory of the value of and other land appurtenant quod indeed rectoria  without terris glebalibus be the moiety which be not like a conveyance or  agreement of party but in shorten enemy but it appear that the rectory consist  of glebe and tithe c else by Twisden it be no rectory but a parsonage but here  it may be understand of the churchyard c distinct from the other land pertain  which the court Windham absent agree and as long as the extent continue it can  thus be deny but there be glebe but in count of ejectment of rectory h can  give evidence only for tithe per curian contra by wile for the plaintiff its  say that the rectory deliver be a moiety not say Keble accord to the value or  quantity which by Maynard be ill send non allocatur it be not say tenant in  seperalitate send non allocatur
berry and burk when debt be bring upon a judgement pen a writ of error upon  what term the court will stay proceed in such action c b sergeant baines move  that the court will make a rule for stay execution after judgement shall he  have in a action of debt that be bring upon a judgement of this court pen a  writ of error but the court say that the old way in these case be to give a  imparlance but in the case of Jackson and ducat hill Geo the court consider  upon this matter and think the best way be to have the defendant give  judgement in the second action and accord the counsel agree to do so and upon  that the court order the execution to be stay Ven
berry and cross from what time the party shall pay cost in case of a  prohibition the plaintiff declare in prohibition and recover the question be  from what time the defendant shall pay cost and the court be of opinion that  he ought to pay cost from the very first application for the prohibition for  the whole be but one suit and the statute of W which give the cost in this  case say that the plaintiff shall pay the cost of suit Mr Fazacherly say that  this very point be determine some time ago in the exchequer in the case of sir  Henry Houghton and Starkey
bertie v lord Falkland Nov Lord Cowper c the cause be hear the that of January  there be a appeal to the house of lord on the minute of the decree all rest  and the decree remain undrawn until the suit abate by the death of Lord  Falkland the plaintiff apply to have the decree draw nunc pro tune it be  object that the suit be abate ought to be revive Lord chancellor the draw up  of a decree be as material a thing as can be take care of and to pass and  enter a decree nunc pro tune be to debar the representative of the decease  party from take that course he may be advice therefore the suit ought to be  revive before the decree be pass and enter nunc pro tune and this court can  execute a decree of the house of lord but by their order
bertie vers Clutterbuck error do not lie in the exchequer Chamber on a award  of execution only andr SC by the name of crow v Maddock Mod salk comb l raym  holt Mod Yelv vent cro James cro car after judgement of a year stand in b r  the plaintiff sue out a to know facias on which he obtain a award of execution  of this only the defendant bring error in the exchequer Chamber and it be hold  that Elizabeth c do not extend to this case and leave be give to take out  execution
BERTUE against style a jointress pay off a mortgage decree to hold over till  she be satisfy the same day another case where a jointress be of land mortgage  between Bertue and style decree that the jointress pay the mortgage she shall  hold over till she and her executor shall be repay with interest
Berwick and FENWOOD No execution on a judgement in ejectment after the year  sans to know facias Northi move for a execution upon a judgement in ejectment  after the year and cite side holt Ch I after judgement in ejectment have lie a  considerable time I do not think it fit to grant execution without a to know  facias notwithstanding that case in side which be not full report for the  tenant may be change c a ejectment be a mix d action it be real in respect of  the land and personal in respect of the damage and cost now a to know facias  lie at commonlaw in all real action Inst discharge the rule and take out  execution at your peril Northi I hope we shall not be punish for a contempt  holt No sir Barth shower it may be inconvenient to take out execution without  a to know facias for a former to have facias possession may be execute and not  return holt Ch I you may compel a return if a to know facias be bring upon a  fine executory it be a good plea to say that it be execute before eyres I if  for cost and damage it must have to know facias upon the statute but whether  for the realty in ejectment old book doubt yet here it seem necessary
berwick versus andrews hill Ann refer to Twycross v grant c p d Mod SC I salk  sand side lev error of a judgement upon nil to say in the common plea the case  be executor bring a action upon a judgement obtain by the testator suggest a  devastavit in the lifetime of the testator and it be object that this carry it  a step far than Wheatle and lane S case in sand for there the action be bring  by the party to the judgement and to who the wrong be do whereas this be first  by one that be no party to the judgement for if he will sue execution upon  this judgement he must have first make himself party by a judgement on a  cognizant fa and next by one to who the tort be not do and this be a personal  tort that ought to die cum mask and that this matter ought not to go a step  far vide vent lev keb that such action will not lie upon a bind suggest a  devastavit and it be for a wrong do to the testator a action ought not to lie  for it for the executor no more than it will lie against a executor de son  tort till car c the record of the case of Wheatle and lane be bring into court  agree exact with this declaration and the plaintiff have judgement
berwick versus andrews mich Ann B R ld raym S C ld raym S C cite refer to  Twycross v grant c p d Mod case executor may bring debt suggest a devastavit  in his testator lifetime upon a judgement obtain by his testator against the  executor of I S lev Mod side Mod judgement be obtain against I S as executor  and now the executor of he that obtain the judgement bring a action of debt  upon that judgement against Salkeld er p the say I S suggest a devastavit in  the lifetime of his testator and have judgement by nothing to say in c b and  now error be bring it be object that the plaintiff be not privy to the  judgement and therefore ought first to have bring his to know facias and then  have suggest a devastavit accord to the case of Wheatle and land sand and that  this be carry devastavits a step further than they have yet go say per cur it  lie for the executor of he to who the wrong be do though it lie not against  the executor of he that do the wrong here the defendant be the person against  who the recovery be and he have admit asset and the executor may as well  maintain this action as he may a action of debt for a escape where his  testator may so a executor of a parson shall maintain debt for tithe as the  testator may for in this case the tort be to the property of the testator and  vest a interest in he and be within the equity of the Siatute de good  asportatis and the same reason hold for a action of debt as for a to know  facias vide side
BERwicx v er simons jf the plaintiff proceed after he have take money out of  court be be not entitle to cost upon a rule to show cause why cost shall not  be pay to the plaintiff it appear that four pound have be bring into court  upon the common rule that after the plaintiff have take the money out of court  be proceed in the action and that he have now discontinue the action the  question be whether the plaintiff ought to have cost to the time of bring the  money into court it be hold that he ought not and by the CourtBy proceed in  the action after the money be bring into court upon the common rule the  plaintiff forfeit his right to cost it be a part of that rule that if the  plaintiff will not accept of the money bring into the court with cost to be  taxedby the master in full discharge of the suit the say sayer er p money  shall be strike out of the declaration and be pay out of court to the  plaintiff and upon the trial of the issue the plaintiff shall not be permit to  give evidence for the say money
best and yates admiral in action upon the case against the defendant retain to  make a coat that he make it inartificial negligent and foolish to which the  defendant demurrer per curian this be too general and it shall say wherein as  too long too short too wide too little c its not say the plaintiff deliver any  cloth to the tailor in which case the plaintiff have no damage by the ill make  but may have refuse the coat nil to take in hand nisi
best contra stamford mich Ann in canc term create for a special purpose after  that determine be attendant on the inheritance Eq Abr p S C vern pre Ch Wilson  feme sole seize in fee upon her marriage with a make a lease to trustee for  year in trust for the husband for his life remainder to herself for life  remainder Salkeld er p to the issue of that marriage remainder to the wife her  executor and administrator husband die without issue she marry a second  husband and die whether this term shall be attendant upon the inheritance or  shall go to the husband as a term in gross be the question et per cur it be a  term attendant because the trust for which it be create be at a end the first  husband be dead without issue as where a term be create to raise portion and  the portion be pay or a term or purchase the inheritance in trust the term  shall be attendant and as for the second husband it can be intend that he be  then think of money article to be lie out in land shall be take as land in  equity for this court be to enforce the execution of agreement and therefore  look upon land agree to be sell as money and money agree to be lie out in land  to be in fact a real estate which shall descend to the heir send qure if money  be article to be lie out in land in a marriage settlement upon failure of  issue and there be no issue but debt by simple contract whether this money  shall be take as land and thereby defeat creditor a a vide Powell on contract  vol ill Br Ch p wms
best versus yates keb in a action upon the case the plaintiff declare that the  defendant be a tailor he retain he to make he a coat well and artificial and  that the defendant malicious intend to abuse and damnify the plaintiff make it  tam inept negligent inartificialiter that it become of no value or use to he  to his damage l to this declaration the defendant demurrer Ventris first for  that he say be retain he and do not show that he deliver he any material so  that the action may lie for spoil of they but this amount to no more than that  he bespeak a garment which when it be make he do not like and so may have  refuse it therefore there do not appear to be any damage Vid the precedent in  astons entry fol second he do not show wherein he have spoil the coat or what  defect there be in it and this ought to have be certain set forth and of this  opinion be the court and judgement be give quod to express grief nil to take  in hand per billam
Bestwick against Camden Intr p c b rot in a quod to let pass in nuisance quod  to lift up quandan nolen England abay by which c the warterhouse of his mill  be stop and it be say b the court that the writ shall abate because mole be a  equivocal term and be not proper for a brook or bay note by all the justice  two executor bring a account against b and have judgement quod to sum up and  after one of they die yet the writ shall not abate but the survivor shall have  a special to know fac ad to sum up in his own name recite t bat the other be  dead
bet against goodman and another upon a affidavit that defendant be indebt to  plaintiff general capias ad to answer be endorse in like manner to hold they  to bail the ac etian be against they several and they be arrest and several  hold to bail and plaintiff have proceed against the sheriff by rule to bring  in the body wright move for defendant for a common barn appearance and to stay  proceed against the sheriff insist that as the affidavit be of a joint demand  and the endorsement agreeable thereto there be no affidavit to warrant bail in  separate action Eyre urge pro quer that the Act of parliament require a  affidavit of the cause of action do not require it to be very particular a  affidavit that defendant be general indebt be sufficient to hold they to bail  joint or several as plaintiff choose to proceed but the court be of opinion  that the affidavit be not sufficient to hold defendant to bail several Eyre  close with a proposal make by wright to accept for the debt and cost in the  joint action
bet and gale officer error of judgement in c b on demurrer in debt on  obligation to pay forty pound per annum so long as he shall have and exercise  the office of register of the archdeacon of Chichester Polyxphen assign that  this be void on Edward cap but by wile justice the statute be not plead this  be no more than obligation by the judge so long as be shall be judge which be  not within the statute which the court agree but if it have be to pay c for  the office it be void and judgement affirm
bet on the demise OF Robson against Egerton in ejectment hill geo Lewis Manson  Watson esquire defendant landlord rule to show cause why writ of hab fac poss  shall not be set aside and possession restore c plaintiff obtain a verdict at  the summer assize in ken saint July defendant bring a writ of error which be  allow Oct but enter into no recognizance nor put in any bail thereon plaintiff  not have get cost tax on the final judgement without which the measure or  quantum of the recognizance can not be fix plaintiff for want of the  recognizance require by the statute or bail within four day take out a writ of  hab fac poss and by virtue thereof on that November take possession of the  premise late in question which the court hold to be regular defendant shall  have apply to stay execution and then the court will have oblige plaintiff to  have procure his cost to be tax the writ of error be no barn supersedeas  without bail a judge will have take bail if apply to the rule discharge vide  stat Charles c vent such on demise of oat and other against Dawson hill Geo  prime and win for plaintiff will and pool for defendant
bet versus Hancock Pas will B R in the admiralty principal defendant die  before sentence and they proceed upon the stipulation against the surety and  prohibition pray qure raym in the admiralty the principal die before sentence  notwithstanding this that court proceed against the bail upon the stipulation  in the nature of a recognizance by which he bind himself and his heir Salkeld  pray a prohibition and insist the court can not take notice of the course or  law of the admiralty be not plead because it be foreign to the commonlaw and  there be a particular reason why they take notice of the spiritual Salkeld law  videlicet that both the spiritual and temporal law be original administer in  the same court a reason which fail in this case also that land be entire under  the protection of the commonlaw and they can not take stipulation in the  realty last that if the defendant have be in gaol and have die within the wall  of the prison the suit must have abate and there be no reason why the suit  shall be in a better condition by the defendant be in custody of his bail than  in case he have be in actual custody and that whereas the security give be  only that the defendant shall abide their judgement the admiralty now have  extend it to the defendant executor on the other side it be say the bail in  the admiralty be sue as principal and this be the course of their court  because the plaintiff and defendant be seafaring man be more than other  subject to casualty adjourn and compound Salkeld er p
bet versus low bankruptcy how plead it be rule in this case that in plead a  man to be a bankrupt it be sufficient to say that he become a bankrupt ad all  men thought separal set up without set forth any particular act of bankruptcy  as departure out of the kingdom take sanctuary or keep his house and abscond  there it be urge that in plead a man to be a simonist this necessary to show  some particular act of simony holt agree because that the word simony be not  in the Act and therefore this necessary to show c to bring the person within  the Act
BETHUN against DINMURE prerogative court caveat day July that a will withhold  by a creditor order to be bring in on the application of the executrix John  crag make his will and appoint his sister Bethun executrix and give his will  to her to keep Bethun leave it in the hand of mrs Dinmure crag be dead and  Dinmure refuse to lee deliver back the will to Bethun the executrix till she  have pay her a debt she say Bethun owe her a decree have be personal serve on  Dinmure to bring the will into court judgment sir george lee I order her to  bring it in peremptory by the that of July
between Fleetwood esquire plaintiff and GUISIPPE Kalends and wife and other  Deforcients that February vacation after hill Geo Lord chief justice assist by  Mr justice clive make a order that this fine shall pass as to say Kalends and  his wife two of the cognizors consider the particular circumstance of the case  notwithstanding the same be not sign by they captain Peter maugre one of the  commissioner attend and make oath that this fine be duly acknowledge before he  and another commissioner by the say Kalends and wife at barn Naples in Italy  that these party be of full age and good understanding and that the marry  woman be examine apart from her husband and consent free the fine be take from  these party beyond sea be not within the late rule require a affidavit and the  sign of a fine by the cognizors be not a essential part the former Lord chief  justice of this court have require the party acknowledge fine before they to  sign copy on paper which have be keep at the chief justice chamber as a check  upon the party the fine on parchment deliver out and pass through the office  be not former sign by the cognizors but at the foot of the caption by the  chief justice only
between gregory Conuzee and croucher and other Conuzors mich geo a fine  between the say party be stop at the king silver office for want of the usual  affidavit a year be lapse since the date of the caption the court upon inspect  the writ of covenant and conuzance make a rule upon the clerk of the king  silver office to show cause why the fine shall not pass and upon hear counsel  for the conuzee and the clerk of the say office and it appear that all the  party be alive at the time when the king silver be pay the fine be order to  pass it be say per cur that all the affidavit which ought to be require at the  king silver office shall be that the party be alive at the time the king  silver be pay which be the prefine
between our lord and lady the king and queen and the cardinal archbishop OF  Canterbury if land hold by knightservice be grant to one in tail remainder to  the king the issue shall not be in ware to any body for by the king acceptance  of the remainder the signiory be extinguish land be hold of the archbishopric  by knightservice and in the time of Edward this land be give by fine to one  dyer a er p Strangewaies in tail remainder in fee to the say king e the tenant  in tail die his issue within age quaere whether he shall be in ware to the  cardinal and it seem not by sander and other e if the king will assent to that  remainder because the tenure and t service above be go and extinct by the  feesimple to the king who can hold of none and so the issue in tail shall be  in ware to no one
between Richard Copgrove who tam c informant and Henry hold claim the property  of a ship or vessel call the Dorothea with her tackle c and a parcel of  molasses seize by the say informant defendant by information of seizure upon  the motion of Mr starke of counsel for the defendant inform the court that the  say Richard Copgrave have late seize as forfeit the ship and good in question  whereto the defendant have enter his claim in this court and that the say  informant have file a information on the Act of navigation the say defendant  duly plead thereto and issue be join thereupon since which the say defendant  have exhibit his bill in this court against the say informant for the  examination of his witness beyond the sea pursuant to the direction of the say  Act of navigation to which bill the say informant be duly serve with the  process of this court appear it be therefore pray that the trial of this cause  may be put off to easter term next and that the defendant may have a  commission to examine his witness in holland and that the deposition of such  witness may be read as evidence at the trial of this cause on the behalf of  the say defendant save all just exception at the say trial and upon read the  affidavit of the say defendant and the say bill it be order by the court that  the trial of this cause be put off to the sit after next Hilary term and that  a Commission with liberty for the say informant to join in the same be award  as pray
between spittle and Davis in a replevin the case be one Turk seize of land in  fee devise parcel thereof to his old son in tail and the other parcel to his  young son in fee Owen er p provide and his intent be that if any of his son or  any of their issue no alien or demise any of the say land before any of they  come to the age of thirty year that then the other shall have the estate and  do not limit what estate and then one of the son make a lease for year before  such age whereupon the other enter and before be come to the age of thirty  year be alien that part into which he make entry and the other brother be the  old enter and make a lease to spittle the plaintiff for three year and Davies  by commandment of the young brother enter and take a horse damagefeasant and  spittle bring a replevin and upon demurrer it seem to the court that this be a  limitation and by virtue of the will the estate devise to they until they  alien and upon the alienation to go to the other upon such alienation the land  be discharge of all limitation for otherwise the land upon one alienation  shall go to one and upon another alienation shall go back again and so to and  from ad infinituni vide dyer and afterward all the judge agree that after one  brother have enter into the land by reason of the alienation that land be  discharge forever of the limitation by the will and judgement be give accord  Owen trin Elizabeth rot
between STICKLEHORNE and HATCHMAN adjudge by the court that if for not scour  of a ditch or must the ground sell of the house be putrify or tree cut down  which be in defence of the house whereby the house by tempest be blow down  waste shall be assign in house pro non scourando c in a ejection strong broker  prothonotary say that where the title of he in the reversion be not disclose  in plead nor come in question aid shall not be grant pasch Elizabeth in c b
between the inhabitant OF SUDDLECOMB and BURSHAW Trin W salk Mod a order of  justice set forth because it be complain of by the churchwarden that the  person remove be likely to become Chargeable therefore they do order c  exception be take to it for that it be not adjudge so by the justice holt KB  holt c j the justice can remove a man unless he be likely to become Chargeable  to the parish for otherwise they may remove a person of a estate and there be  this diversity where the order be whereas it appear to we on the complaint c  that r S be likely to become Chargeable c that will be well enough holt KB er  p but where it be as here whereas complaint have be make that he be likely e  that be ill this case be agree to be refer to the judge of assize
between the king and lord Dacres for the college OF GRAYSTOCKE the college of  Graystocke have a master but presentable priusts with stipend and though  always call so have no common seal be not a college within statute e c  Elizabeth a b Johnson case Goldsb pl that it have be often rule upon the  statute e c that chanceries in reputation be give by the same statute to the  king as well as chanceries in foundation saint by the statute of the present  king c all manner of college be give to the king also to prove this to be a  college there have be six priusts beside the master continual resident at  Graystocke and each of these have five mark per and beside their bed and a  room and the master forty pound per and also it be certify in the book of  firstfruits and ten rectoria et collegium de Graystocke also it be find by  pope Urban at the request of Ralph baron of Graystocke ancestor to Lord Dacres  it have also always be call a college and on the other side it be allege that  it be not a college because the master be presentable and have admission and  institution from the bishop and be not elect beside they never have a common  seal this corporation be also null unless it have a legal commencement and so  the opinion of the judge hale justice only except be that the king be not  entitle to the college by the act dyer b er p
between the parish OF Albrighton and Skipton order upon appeal from a order of  removal make by two justice quorum One the session recite that they have  peruse the charter of Albrighton and it not appear thereby that the two  justice be either of they of the quorum therefore they quash the order of  removal per curian the order of session must be quash not for want of any  power in the session to look into the jurisdiction of the two justice for that  they certain have vide king v inhabitant of Stotfold term Rep No Rep S c but  because that want of jurisdiction be not sufficient allege since they may have  a jurisdiction though it do not appear upon the charter of Albrighton the  session shall have say in general that it appear to they that the two justice  be neither of they of the quorum and that will have be good cause to quash the  order of the two justice vide Geo c Geo c black Com
between the parish OF Aldenham and abbot langley in come hertford there can be  a settlement by constructive notice Sess can p No barn b r Foley Foley report  that it be hold tantamount to a notice in write but all the other report of  the case be contra a Bott by Const pl S c upon a special order of session it  be state that a poor person forty year ago come into a parish and live there  ever since that he attend the leet amend the highway have a pew in the church  five child and do watch and ware say per curian those be not annual office in  the parish and the James c be purposely make to avoid these constructive  notice and require notice in write and therefore they hold it no settlement  vide king v inhabitant of whittlesea term Rep
between the parish OF BARLEYCROFT and COLEOVERTON in come rutland where a  certificate man be send back there needs no adjudication of his not gain a  settlement during his stay and if it appear the certificate be legal allow  that supply the want of show air attestation order of removal from b to c  recite that the party have fifteen year since come with a certificate allow  accord to the Act of parliament from c to b and be now actual Chargeable they  send he back to c this be move to be quash because they do not say that during  the fifteen year he gain no settlement in b for a certificateman may gain a  settlement as well as any other say non allocatur for all that be necessary to  be show be the certificate and that the party be Chargeable and the length of  time make no difference second exception it be not say the certificate be  attest but only that it be allow say per curian the attestation be by the  statute make previous to the allowance and therefore when they say it be allow  accord to the Act of parliament we must intend it be attest for otherwise it  can not be so allow the order be confirm
between the parish OF bishop hatfield and saint peters in saint Alban hire  servant be settle where the service S Sess can No Foley fort burr SC burr Bott  by Const pl cite and explain by Lord Mansfield in Alton v Elvetham burr SC  ante order of two justice to remove a man and his wife and their daughter from  Hatfield to saint Peter upon appeal to the session they state the case special  that August Henry Langley be hire in saint Peter by Mr Arnold who have no  settlement there for one year to serve as his huntsman that Mr Arnold have a  dogkennel in saint Peter where Langley be diet and serve the year but inasmuch  as Arnold himself have no settlement there they vacate the order which send he  to saint Peter et per curian the order of session must be quash for this be  exact the case of the servant employ on the road to look after stage horse  belong to one who live elsewhere and yet the settlement be adjudge to be where  the service be king v east Ilsley burr SC S p strange pro saint Peter
between the parish OF BURLESCOME and SAMPFORD peverell execute the office of  tithingman gain a settlement the session on a special order adjudge that  execute the office of tithingman will not gain a settlement et per curian the  order must be quash for this be a annual office in the parish within the word  and meaning of the Act of parliament
between the parish OF CHEWTON and compton martin though the parish be the same  yet different person can be remove by the same order upon independent  settlement W c two justice make one order for the removal of two different  family and the session upon appeal quash the order for insufficiency and to  maintain the order of session reeve object to the order of two justice that  though the parish be the same in both case yet the removal of two family by  one order be ill for suppose the removal of one be legal and the other illegal  and there be a appeal to the session as to both and the order be confirm as to  one and reverse as to the other what be to be do in that case as to cost the  statute of W c give cost to the parish in who favour the appeal be determine  and now the appeal will be determine in favour of neither and of both it can  be say that the order be reverse because it stand good as to part and it can  be say to be confirm because it be not hold good as to the whole Eyre and  fortescue justice be of opinion that the order be ill give this further reason  that the party remove have a right to appeal for it may be he be remove from  his own estate and then upon his appeal it will consequential draw over the  other matter in which perhaps the party on all side acquiesce the chief  justice say he have not full consider it but his two brother be clear that the  order of the two justice be ill and the counsel for maintenance of that order  refuse to refer the whole matter to the judge of assize he pronounce the rule  that the order of session shall be confirm
between the parish OF comb and WESTWOODHAY there must be a complete hire and  service for a year to gain a settlement Cas Sett and Rem p S c in  michaelmasday happen to be of a Thursday a man be hire upon the Saturday  follow to serve from the say Thursday after michaelmasday to Michaelmas follow  all this be state for the opinion of the court and the first question be  whether there be a complete see ante hire for a year for if the word say he  reject then there want a week but if you keep it in and refer it to  michaelmasday then by reject the word after michaelmasday it will stand as a  hire from one Michaelmas to another and Eyre I think it may well be so say the  other contra for it will be to make it nonsense in contract to serve for a  time pass whereas if the word say he reject the rest be natural enough the  other question be whether admit the hire to be complete there be a good fide  service fair and without fraud be to be favour burr Rep any service for a year  in pursuance of it as the statute require the contract be make upon the  Saturday and Eyre I say it may be intend he be those two day upon trial and so  the service will be sufficient but the rest hold that such a service will  signify nothing for it be not in pursuance of any hire there strange report er  p must first be a hire and then a service and not vice line a service and then  a hire king v Westwell barn king v south Cerney Sess Cas Bott SC king v Newton  burr SC king v Ilam ib king v Syderstone cum Berner call Doug note king v  Harwood or Hanwood Doug call king v Mursley term Rep king v Martin term  Rep 25r S p
between the parish OF Cotleigh and Stockland what a purchase of l value to  make a settlement burr Sett can SC more full a acre in Cotleigh wherein a have  a lease for life be mortgage to a pauper for l when the mortgagor die there be  two year interest due and he also owe l S to the mortgagee by bind and simple  contract and it be agree between the widow and the mortgagee that he shall  administer and take all but the household good which he do and the session  have hold that his take to this acre and live on it eight year do not gain a  settlement under Geo c which require a good fide payment of l the court now  quash the order it be to all intent of law and equity the same as actual  payment of the consideration money
between the parish OF CRANLY and saint mary Guilford a lease at will gain a  settlement Cas of set and Rem p No S c upon a special order of session it be  state that a certificateman agree with the lessee of a mill king v Butley post  that he shall occupy the mill and pay per annum that strange report er p there  be no underlease or assignment but in pursuance of that agreement the  certificateman occupy the mill two year and pay the rend the session adjudge  it no settlement et per curian the order must be quash for if this be not a  absolute lease for a year as Eyre justice say it be the rend strange be  reserve as the rend for a year yet it be undoubted a lease at will which be  sufficient to gain a settlement
between the parish OF CURENDEN and LALAND in lancashire where the duty on  apprentice be not pay the apprentice gain no settlement fitzg Sess can p No  barn b r Bott by Const pl S c upon a special order of settlement it be state  that a poor boy be bind out strange report er p apprentice by indenture and  the master have S pay he that he serve three year but that the master never  pay the duty of d in the pound accord to Ann c which say that if the duty be  not pay the indenture shall be void to all intent and purpose whatsoever the  case be refer to fortescue justice who go the circuit and he hold it a  settlement because master have six month to pay the duty in so that during  those six month a strange settlement be gain and it shall not be in the power  of the master to defeat it by matter ex post facto and pursuant to this  opinion the session hold it a settlement but upon debate in b r the order be  quash in king v inhabitant of Natland where a case have be by consent refer to  the judge of assize for his opinion b r hold that it ought to be consider as  final and refuse to enter into a discussion of the question and discharge the  rule for quash the order of session burr SC for they say it be make the  indenture good to one purpose when the Act of parliament have make it void to  all intent and purpose whatsoever and though it be a hard case they can not  break through the positive word of the Act so the order be quash vide king v  holbech burr SC king v Llanvair Duffryn clwyd ib S P but where the  consideration money be under S the indenture be not void for want of this  stamp Baxter v Faulam will king v Yarmouth burr SC
between the parish OF Deddington and DUNFREW a certificateman gain a  settlement by purchase burr Sett can S c a certificateman purchase a house for  l live in it many year then sell it and become Chargeable be send back it be  insist that W c sa ing a certificateman shall gain a settlement by no act  whatsoever unless the take l per annum or serve a annual office this man  notwithstanding the purchase may be send back and it be say to differ from the  case of Burclear v Eastwoodhay pasch Geo where the surrender of a copyhold to  the certificatemans wife be hold to gain he a settlement because there it be  not his own act as this purchase be but it come to he by operation of law the  court do not think this a sufficient distinction and say a purchase be in its  nature a except case and his sell it afterward make no alteration as be hold  Trin Geo between saint Neots and saint clear king v west Shefford burr SC king  v Wivelingham Doug accord this also as to a purchase by a certificateman be  hold the last term in the case of the parish of Stansfield burr Rep SC Sess  can No
between the parish OF denham and Dalham in suffolk two house in a  extraparochial place be not enough to denominate a ville burr Sett can and  Sess can Edward vol p No SC Cas tempt hard Cunn S c upon a special order it be  state that walker hire a farm in Denham above l per annum and live on it from  to and pay parish rate that then he go and live for several year on in  Southwold which be a extraparochial place consist of two house and acre of  land belong to and in the occupation of different person but it not appear  there have be any overseer of the poor the session confirm the order of two  justice for send he to Denham strange move to quash both it have be determine  salk and in the case of Rufford ante that a settlement may be gain in a  extraparochial place contain more house than one so as to come under the  denomination of a ville or township the power in Elizabeth c in parish be by  the statute car c extend to all township and village say per curian that be a  pretty liberal construction on the statute which plain relate to township in  large parish but two see post five house n to d ed house be not enough to  bring it within the denomination of a ville or township Inst it must consist  de more lodging et neighborhood and shall have a petty constable Mod this do  not appear to have the reputation of a ville so the order must be affirm king  v Showler and Atter burr king v the inhabitant of Belvoir Sess can pl
between the parish OF eastland and WESTHORSLEY turn the servant out of door  before the end of the year do not prevent the settlement fort SC by the name  of the inhabitant of west Hertley and east clendon the fact be state special  on a order of session that a servant be hire for a year and the day before the  year expire the master tell he that to prevent big gain a settlement in that  parish he shall go away immediate which the servant refuse to do insist to  serve out the year whereupon the master turn he out of door and the court hold  this to be such a fraud in the master as shall not prevent the settlement of  the servant king v Islip ante Seaford and Castlechurch post and the case there  cite
between the parish OF Fittleworth and Pulborough in sussex b r a certificate  person come from one parish to another and be choose tithingman but before he  have serve the office a year become Chargeable he be removable William  Overington with his wife and three child come with a certificate from  Pulborough to Fittleworth and after continue in the parish of f some time  William oh at a courtleet hold for the bishop of Winchester for the manor of  Amberley within which part of the say parish of f lie be elect and swear  tithingman cold Waltham that after have continue in that office five month he  become Chargeable to and receive relief of the say parish of f whereupon he be  remove to the parish of Pulborough by a order of two justice Pulborough appeal  to the session who state this matter special and be of opinion that W gain a  settlement at Fittleworth quash the order of the two justice and now it be  move by sir John strange and Mr Burrell to quash the order of session and to  confirm the order of the two justice they insist that the pauper have gain no  settlement at f first because the manor where he be choose and swear  tithingman do not extend through the whole parish dly because he do not serve  the office a whole year and be Wilson king bench actual remove before the year  be expire and of that last opinion be the whole court so quash the order of  session and confirm that of the two justice lee c j say that as soon as the  pauper become Chargeable the two justice have jurisdiction to remove he but  lie no stress upon the manor or office not extend through the whole parish but  they all hold that he must serve the office for a whole year or can not  thereby gain a settlement note Mr justice chapel be absent all this term by  reason of sickness
between the parish OF Foston and Carlton after a order of removal be quash the  party can be remove a second time without state a new settlement ante two  justice send a poor person from Foston to Carlton on appeal the order be quash  and at three month end two justice without show any new settlement since the  last order make a new order to remove he from f to g a second time et per  curian the last order must be quash the case of barrow v Ingoldsby Pas Ann be  at the distance of nine month but the court quash it because there can be no  inconvenience in put they to show a new settlement Capel v west Pecham fort  Reg v bishop Walton Fol king v leigh call S p but this be to be understand of  a order quash upon the merit and not upon a defect in form king v Penge nol  Rep
between the parish OF great chart and Kennington a justice can join in remove  a pauper from his own parish burr Sett can SC with another point two justice  of peace make a order of removal which be quash at session strange report er p  because one of the justice of the peace be a inhabitant of the parish from  whence the pauper be remove this statement that the justice be a inhabitant be  think by the court to be insufficient and they say that the case ought to be  actual amend in pursuance of which it be state that he be charge and  Chargeable and pay the poor rate burr SC upon debate in b r it be insist that  car c give the power to any two justice of the peace and so have be the  practice and the instance of corporation where there be but two justice of the  peace or but one parish be insist on and beside there lie a appeal but the  court hold that this be a judicial act and the party interest be tacit except  Lord Raymond who live in the parish of Abbott Langley go off the bench when  one of their order come before the court they say the practice can not  overturn so fundamental a rule of justice as that a party interest can not be  a judge and as to the case of corporation they say that if it appear there be  no other justice it may be allow to prevent a failure of justice and therefore  they confirm the order of session vide the Act Geo c to remedy this salk
between the parish OF Hasfield and Furley in Gloucestershire a child can be  with the grandmother for nurture and a boy with her can be remove if he have a  estate in the parish burr Sett can SC upon a special order of session relate  to the settlement of a boy of eight year and a girl of six who have be remove  by two justice from Furley to Hasfield it be state that the mother of these  child have a estate of l per annum in Furley where she and her husband live  and have these child that she die the husband become tenant by the courtesy  and while such he take l per annum in Hasfield and live one year there with  his two child and then die that the child be find with their grandmother at  Furley be both remove to Hasfield which order the session confirm and now the  court upon argument confirm the order as to the girl but quash they as to the  boy for as to the boy he strange be tenant in fee of the l per annum and  though it be not state that he be actual upon that spot yet it be enough that  he have such a estate in the parish from which he can not be remove but as to  the daughter it be otherwise she can demand no maintenance out of her brother  estate and it be never yet determine that child shall go to a grandmother for  nurture she may indeed be charge to contribute to their relief in the parish  where they be settle
between the parish OF Heptonstall and EVINGDON in yorkshire where child be  send as actual settle their age need not be set out burr Sett can SC more full  a man and four child be send to Heptonstall as the place of their settlement  and I except that the age of the child be not set out say per curian that be  only necessary where they be send consequential to the father settlement but  here be a express adjudication of their actual settlement order confirm king v  Bramshaw burr SC king v Uffculm ib king v high Walton ib king v bowl ib S p
between the parish OF HOBEY and Kingsbury adjudication of husband settlement  sufficient to send the wife with he two justice adjudge the settlement of the  husband to be at Kingsbury and that he be likely to become Chargeable to Hobey  send he his wife and son of one year old to Kingsbury and whether this be good  as to the wife and child be the question and hold well enough and the order  confirm
between the parish OF Ivinghoe and stonebridge apprentice live forty day in a  parish after his master who be certificate purchase a estate gain a settlement  Sess can p No Bott by Const vol pl p S c upon a special order of session the  case be state for the opinion of the court that in one Richard plower be bind  apprentice to one John emerton who be legal settle in Ivinghoe that he serve  art of his time there and then the master go with all his family as a  certificateman to Stonebridge where he purchase a estate of the value of l and  after such purchase the apprentice live with he six month till the  apprenticeship expire and because the statute Ann c provide that the  apprentice of a certificateman shall gain no settlement in the parish to which  the master go by certificate therefore the justice adjudge the settlement at  Ivinghoe where the bind and great part of the service be et per curian the  order must be quash for as the apprenticeship expire in the statute Ann be out  of the case not be make with any retrospect and then the case be no strange  more than that a apprentice of a certificateman life forty day in Stonebridge  which before that statute be enough to gain he a settlement but if this have  be a case since the statute yet we think the settlement will be in Stonebridge  for accord to the case of Burclear and Eastwoodhay pasch Geo in b r when a  certificateman make a purchase he immediate cease to be there in nature of a  certificateman and become a settle inhabitant so that lie the statute out of  the case as we must do it be nothing to the purpose in this view here be a  service for six month as a apprentice in a parish where the master be legal  settle which be more than sufficient to give a settlement to the apprentice
between the parish OF king Norton and cambden in Gloucestershire hire for a  year to work by the piece gain a settlement burr Sett can and Sess can S c  mary Calcut a pauper be remove by two justice from king Norton to Camden on  appeal the session reverse the order state that the pauper be hire for a year  to Ellis of cambden to spin yarn at d per stone and that she be to provide  herself with victual and lodging that she spin the whole year and board and  lodge at her master allow S per week for the same but upon her examination she  say that by her contract she think herself at liberty to play or be absent  from her work as long as she please only that she be not at liberty to work  for any other master king v Birmingham call Doug S p et per curian the session  have do wrong in adjudge this no settlement in cambden for in fact here be a  hire and service for a year to the master there and what her apprehension be  or whether she be pay by the year or by the quantity of her work be immaterial  king v Dedham burr SC king v Seaton and beer Bott by Const pl S p and  therefore the order of session be quash and the order of two justice confirm
between the parish OF Kinver and stone in come stafford rend a cony warren be  a settlement salk Sess can p No upon a special order of session it be state  that a poor person rend a cony warren and a cottage upon it at l per and which  the justice be of opinion do not gain he a settlement within the statute of  car say per curian a mill have be hold to be a tenement within that statute  and why not this it be his ability to pay l per and that be the foundation of  the settlement and whether he pay it for a house for habitation or for a  warren which bring he in a profit be not material the order of session must be  quash king v Piddletrenthide term Rep S p
between the parish OF Kirton and weston in Nottinghamshire evidence of fraud  be not sufficient in a order burr Sett can and Sess can Edward vol p No S c  upon a special order of session it be state that the pauper take a farm of l  per annum in Kirton which have be let at that rend for six year last pass but  before only at l per annum and be also take a bytack of S year in Kirton and  his family live ten month there that when he first take these tenement he be  not of ability to stock they and be tell by the former tenant that l per annum  be too much he answer he do not regard the dearness for as it be l ayear it  will gain he a settlement and put a end to a dispute between two town but  desire a former tenant to take no notice of this to any body the session  determine this to be no settlement in Kirton but the order be remove be quash  for the court say they can not hold this to be fraudulent it not be so adjudge  and evidence of fraud be not sufficient in what instance the court may form  the conclusion of fraud although it be not special state by the session in  their case vide Whaddington and Tedford ante and the case cite in the note and  as to the value they must take it to be accord to the rend unless the contrary  be state for as it S a removal of a man from his farm it shall be show to be  under value
between the parish OF Ladock and saint ENNIDORE serve out the year with a  executor in another parish be a settlement there burr Sett can SC much full  vin Abr S c a person be hire for a year and serve half a year when the master  die the executor who live in another parish ask the servant if she will serve  out the year with he she do so and now on the authority of the case of  Ivinghoe ante the court hold it a settlement in the executor parish for the  last service be not to be consider as a new agreement but a continuation of  the first strange report er p
between the parish OF LIDNEY and stroud in gloucester poor burr Sett can and  Sess can Edward p vol No Bott by Const vol SC all more full upon a special  order of session it be state that a maid be hire for a quarter of a year and  if she and her master like one another she be to continue the whole strange  report er p year and have for her year wage that she stay the year out and  have her and this on debate be hold to be a settlement king v new Windsor burr  SC king v Atherton ib post king v saint ebb ib S p and vide the opinion of  foster I that these case have carry the matter as far as possible king v Ilam  ib
between the parish OF little BITHAM and Somerby a be send by order of two  justice to b as the place of his last legal settlement b appeal and the order  be confirm soon after without state that a have gain any new settlement b send  he to c et per curian a order of reversal be final only between the two parish  saint Michael Bedingham and Kingston Bowsley salk Foston v Carlton post  Bradenham v Thames burr SC Cirencester and Coln saint aldwins ib king v  Bentley ib king v leigh call ace but a defective order quash for informality  be not final between the contend parish queen v bishop Walton Fol Bott pl burn  justice anon vent king v Penge nol Rep and see moyer hanger and warden Sett  and Rem pl Sess can pl but if it be confirm it be final as to all the world  and therefore no new settlement appear the order of removal from b must be  quash Alderton v Felingtowe Bott pl
between the parish OF Lydlinch and hilton bastard of a certificate person be  settle where bear burr set can and Sess can Edward vol p No S c the case of  new Windsor and while Waltham ante a Trin Geo turn chief on the certificate be  conclusive to the parish which give it and certify two person as man and wife  it now come under debate again and be determine that the bastard of a  certificate person be settle where bear and be not a it be agree that the word  child mean a legitimate child only see burr Settl Cas note to d edition child  to be send back within the meaning of the statute
between the parish OF Maidstone and DETHING the adjudication need not mention  what parish the party be likely to become Chargeable to it be hold well enough  in a order of removal to show a complaint that the party be come into the  parish of a and be likely to become Chargeable without say far to the say  parish of a vide king v Witham super montem ante and the note
between the parish OF Nympsfield and Woodchester in Gloucestershire a order  unappealed from to remove a man and his wife be conclusive as to afterborn  child burr Settl can l Bott by Const pl SC in a man and his wife be remove  from Nympsfield to Woodchester and there be no appeal they have afterward  return to Nympsfield and have there three child who be now send from  Nympsfield to Woodchester together with the father and upon appeal as to the  child it be offer to give strange in evidence that the man have a former wife  and consequent the child bear at Nympsfield be as bastard settle there the  session refuse to let Woodchester go into this evidence be of opinion that  Woodchester be conclude by the first order unappealed from and that it make no  difference that the child veer bear afterward the court upon debate confirm  both order for the marriage be establish by the first order the settlement of  the child which be derivative follow of course and can no way be impeach but  by enter into the merit of the first order which have be acquiesce in and  nothing be more establish than that a order unappealed from be conclusive salk  Carth king v Silchester burr SC king v Kirkby Stephen Bott by Const pl king v  Hinksworth call king v Southowram term Rep king V Kenilworth term Rep S p
between the parish OF ovingdon and NORTHORAM in yorkshire money advance for  clothes need not pay the apprentice duty Ann c S burr Sett can and Sess can  Edward Vol p no S c upon the settlement of a apprentice it be state that the  mother propose to strange report er p put he out to a inhabitant of Northoram  who refuse to take he because be want clothes upon which the grandfather agree  that he will pay to the master to cloth the boy with all in pursuance of which  the master do lie out S in clothes for he and he be bind by indenture in which  no mention be make of the S nor be any duty pay that the grandfather pay the S  and the apprentice serve out his time which the session adjudge to be a  settlement et per curian the order be confirm for this be not like the case of  Curenden v Laland where there be money actual give to the master for his own  use whereas here the master be a mere agent of the grandfather to lie out S  for he and it can make no difference whether the master do it or any body else  that this be not a case within the intent of Ann c the positive word of which  in a case express within it oblige the court in the other case to hold it no  settlement king v Leighton term Rep nol Rep S p vide also king v Porisea burr  SC strange trinity term see burr Sett Cas pl to d ed george king in b r sir  William lee Knt chief justice sir Francis page Knt sir Edmund probin Knt sir  William chapel Knt justice sir Dudley rider Knt attorneygeneral sir John  strange Knt solicitor general
between the parish OF PAULSBURY and WOODON a child may gain a new settlement  with the mother after the father death l raym Sess can p No Fol fort Barnard b  r two S c upon a special order of session the case appear to be that a man  with his wife and child be settle in Paulsbury at his death after which the  wife remove to a copyhold of her own in Woodon and carry the child be fourteen  year old with her and it live there many year and now it come to be a question  where the child be settle and the justice adjudge that it gain no settlement  with the mother and therefore send it back to a father settlement in Paulsbury  and upon consideration the court quash the order say it have be adjudge to be  settle with the mother mich Geo between the parish of saint George and saint  strange report er p Catherine vide this case report in l raym Sess can pl fort  a but say if it have be res integral they shall have doubt whether a  settlement gain under the head of the family can be divest by a derivative one  from the inferior king v Barton turf burr SC king v Oulton ib king v long  Wittenham Bott by Const pl S p
between the parish OF Puckington and CHEPTON BEENCHAMP in come somerset the  bankruptcy of the master do not dissolve the apprenticeship l raym Mod Sess  can c fort Cas of Sett and Rem pl fol Bott by Const pl S c upon a special  order the case be state that a be bind a apprentice and serve and inhabit two  year till a commission of bankruptcy be take out against the master at which  time the apprentice without have the indenture deliver up or any discharge at  the session hire himself as a common servant into another parish and serve a  year the session adjudge this to be no dissolution of the apprenticeship and  consequent that the settlement of the apprentice be in the first parish where  he be bind et per curian their judgement be right there can be no dissolution  of the contract unless the indenture have be deliver up or the session have  discharge he as no doubt they will have do if they have be apply to and then  as the first contract have continuance the apprentice have no power to hire  himself and the service afterward for a year be void as to any pretence of  give he a settlement vide the case collect Bott by Const and burn Edward title  settlement by apprenticeship from to that service must be take as a service to  the first master who by law be entitle to the wage and therefore the order  must be confirm strange report er p
between the parish OF Ratcliff culy and Exall in to cause to go Coventry a  order to common intent be good Sess can p No S c upon a order for removal of a  widow and her two child from Exall to Ratcliff culy it appear that some time  since one a b be hire and serve for a year in the parish of r c and gain no  other settlement before his death therefore the justice adjudge the wife and  her child to be settle in r c and send they thither as to the settlement of  the husband reeve move to quash the order because a marry man gain no  settlement by any hire or service and likewise because the child be call her  child and not his say per curian we never make intendment to destroy a order  and it do not appear he be marry at the time of the hire and if he be marry  during the service that will not prevent his settlement and as to the child we  must intend they to be his by her till the contrary appear and that they be so  be implicit aver in the adjudication of the child be settle with he for that  they can not be if they be her child by a former husband so we must take they  to be his order confirm
between the parish OF road in somersetshire and north Bradley in wilts the  court will intend a order late serve where the order on appeal be make at the  next session but one Sess can p No S c a pauper be remove from road to north  Bradley north Bradley give notice to appeal on which road take he back but  however get their order confirm at session the next session set both aside as  fraudulent and now road insist that the order be good as not be appeal from at  the next quarter session and as to the other that it be not in the power of  one session to set aside the act of the other vide king v Cockfield salk all  be now before the court they quash the first order as be proper quashable on  appeal and will not take notice that it be not at the next session after  service of the order which be in the case of a recent appeal they will suppose  to have be serve too late for a appeal to the next session king v Norton ante  king v Turley Sess can pl ace and as to the order of confirmation they quash  that as not be make on any appeal and consequent without jurisdiction salk S p  and at the same time quash the latter part of the second session order that  rescind that confirmation as not be proper before they
between the parish OF RYSLIP and hendon hill and mich W Mod counsel move to  quash a order of the session which be make for the removal of a poor man from  Ryslip to Hendon who have be before remove from another parish and be  afterward on a appeal send back again it insist that the order by which he be  remove to Hendon be not good for the statute pound car give a authority to  send poor person to the place of their last legal settlement and therefore the  justice at their session have once settle this person at Ryslip and so execute  their authority he be not to be remove after it holt c j where the justice of  peace do sive a special reason for their settlement and the conclusion which  they make in point of law will not warrant the premise there we will rectify  their judgement but if they have give no reason at all then we will not ravel  into the fact and here it appear that the person have a freehold at Hendon  which descend to he now if this man may go and live there fort that day as  certain be may be shall not be disturb and though the justice do adjudge this  not to be a settlement yet we determine it otherwise accord to law indeed it  be say that the justice of peace have adjudge the matter upon a appeal between  holt KB Ryslip and Hendon and this be conclusive for we can falsify their  judgement though it by illegal we can correct they in fact of which they be  judge and the chief justice hold that have land in a parish will not make a  settlement but live in the parish where one have land will gain a settlement  without notice for the Act of parliament never mean to banish man from the  enjoyment of their own land and the law take notice of freeholder as those  that choose member of parliament c
between the parish OF saint george hanover square and saint james westminster  poor burr Sett can more full and Sess can Edward vol No S c upon a order of  session the case be state special that Alice Wheeler a parish girl be bind by  indenture a apprentice to George Wheeler in saint George parish where she  serve forty day and her master afterward let her out for hire to a person in  Marybone where she reside above forty day but the master receive her wage and  find her clothes the session hold that the last service gain her no settlement  and consequent she be settle at saint George but the court quash the order be  of opinion that there be no difference between the master hire her out and her  own act and that it be like the case of a bind to a and serve b where it have  be always hold to be a settlement in b s parish so the order of session be  quash king v inhabitant of baste v Bridgeford burr SC king saint Petrox ib  king v Clapham ib king v saint mary kallendar in Winchester ib king v  Tavistock ib vide also d lib No some of these case turn upon the assignment of  the apprentice other upon his serve another master by consent without a  assignment and other upon his discharge but in all of they it be consider what  shall under the particular circumstance of each case amount to such a service  under a indenture as will be sufficient to gain a settlement burr SC note
between the parish OF saint John the baptist in devise and saint james in  bishop kenny apprentice be settle where he lie l raym case of Sett and Rem pl  fort pl Mod Foley Bott by Const vol pl S c upon a special order state that a  be bind apprentice to b and serve five year in the parish of saint John but  have always lie in the parish of saint James with his father the session  adjudge it a settlement in saint John et per curian the order must be quash  the serve without lie make no inhabitation which be necessary to gain a  settlement in the case of a apprentice and so it be hold in the case of saint  olaf Jewry ante and in the case of saint mary coal church v Radcliff ante
between the parish OF saint Michael COSLANY in norwich and saint Matthew in  Ipswich if a son grow up do not remove with his father he gain no settlement  in the last place his father live in barn b r andr Sess can p No Bott by Const  pl SC more full upon a order of session the case be special state on a removal  of Edmund William and any his wife and Edmund Solomon and any their child from  saint Michael to saint Matthew that Edmund William the elder the father of  Edmund William remove be settle at Shipton mallet and afterward remove to  Bruton where he continue twenty year and have Edmund the son bear there who he  breed up in his own trade till nineteen year old when he leave his father and  come to Norwich and marry and have the three child that since the birth of the  child old Edmund the grandfather gain a settlement in Ipswich to which the two  justice remove the family but the session be of opinion their settlement be  not at Ipswich discharge the order strange et per cur the order of session be  right for there be no colour to say the son and his family be settle at  Ipswich where they never be and this be exact the same case as that of  Eastwoodhay and Westwoodhay ante bugden v Ampthill burr SC S p see also upon  this subject king v Walpole saint Peter burr SC king v Offchurch term Rep king  v Witton cum Twambrooke ib king v collingbourn leader term Rep but then a  exception be take to the order of session that it be say to be make at a  session hold by adjournment such a day and do not show that the session  commence within the time prescribe by the Act it shall have be ad sitting  begin such a day and hold by adjournment after and for this fault the order of  session be quash strange pro Ipswich king v Harrowby burr SC king v  Heptonstall ib S p strange report er p
between the parish OF saint Michael in bath and NUNNY in come somerset order  to remove a marry woman be good unless it appear she be send from her husband  vide burr SC order of removal recite that the wife of b who be now live and c  his child have intrude c and be likely c and that the place of settlement of  the wife and child be in saint Michael they be therefore remove thither it be  move to quash the order because it do not appear the husband be at the time of  the removal in the parish of saint Michael so that it may be they send the  wife away from the husband say strange per curian we can intend he be not if  he be in the parish from which she be send that indeed will vitiate the order  but as neither of these fact appear against the order to satisfy we that it be  bad we be not to presume it to be so and therefore it must be confirm vide  king v Ironacton burr SC king v high Walton ib and king v Hincksworth Doug and  king v leigh ib strange report er p
between the parish OF saint peter in sandwich and GOOLASTON in ken servant go  to sea with his master leave and find another to do his work be settle burr  Sett can S c a servant be hire for a year during which he with his master  leave go to strange report er p sea upon the herring fishery but hire another  to do his work in the mean time be return at the end of three week after the  expiration of his year settle with his master and receive his whole year wage  this the session hold be not a service for a year but the court on the  authority of the case of Islip ante and Beccles v leostoff ante hold it a  settlement say he be to be consider all the while as in the service of his  master king v Ivinghoe ante S p per Pratt c I and the person he find to do his  work be his servant and not the master wherefore the order be quash
between the parish OF Seaford and castle church go away twelve day before the  end of the year prevent a settlement burr Sett can S c on a special order of  session it be state that the pauper be hire for a year which he serve till the  last twelve day when he go away without the master leave and stay till after  the year be up when he return for his clothes and be pay the whole year wage  and on consideration that if they once allow this absence for twelve day at  the end of the year which differ from a absence in the middle of the year  which be purge by take he again they shall not know where to stop it be  determine that he gain no settlement paulet v birnham Bott by Const pi sheen v  Godalming ib pi Sess can pi king v north Basham ib pi S p and see king v  Caverswall burr SC king v Grantham term Rep king v Clayhydon term Rep but  there may be a absence for the last day of the year which will be no  dissolution of the contract and therefore the servant will gain a settlement  vide king v Islip ante king v Preston Bott pl king v Goodnestone burr SC post  king v Nether heyford ib king v Christchurch ib king v froome selwood ib king  v Haddington ib king v potter heigham ib king v Richmond ib king v saint  Bartholomew Cornhill call king v saint Philip in Birmingham term Rep king v  saint Andrew Holborn ib king v Sulgrave term Rep
between the parish OF sheehead in Leicestershire and MELBORNE in derbyshire  officiate as schoolmaster and receive l per and do not gain a settlement burr  Sett Cas and will Rep S c a person be certificate from sheehead to Melborne  and stay there ten year during which time the lady Elizabeth Hastings convey  land to trustee for several charity out of the profit and inter alian the sum  of l per annum to the charityschool at Melborne to be pay to the vicar there  for the time be in a special order of session it be state that the  certificateman officiate as schoolmaster several year and receive the l per  annum from the vicar and this the session hold gain he a settlement in  Melborne where they declare he have a freehold estate et per curian the order  must be quash for it do not appear how he come into this employment and the  legal right to receive the salary be in the vicar who not care to officiate  himself have therefore pay it over to this man as his deputy which can never  give any person a settlement much less to a certificateman in the other report  it be state that a schoolmaster be not a annual office
between the parish OF sheehead in Leicestershire and Milburn in derbyshire b r  stram SC schoolmaster who be a certificateman gain no settlement Thomas  Membury a certificateman come from the parish of sheehead to the parish of  Milburn by a certificate date November be a schoolmaster and teach the  charityschool there until his death in but in what manner he be admit to this  school it do not appear but only in general that he officiate till his death  that lady Ann Hastings have by deed convey to trustee per and in trust to be  pay to the vicar of Milburn for the time be for the charityschool that this  per and have not be appropriate to any other use than pay it to the  schoolmaster and whether Thomas Membury have gain a settlement at Milburn  either as serve a office or as have a freehold in the school of ayear be the  question and the session be of opinion and declare he gain a settlement there  as have have a freehold in the school but per curian absent foster I a  schoolmaster be not a office but only a employment and what interest Thomas  Membury have in the school whether for life or how otherwise or bow he be  admit to or come into this employment do not appear and that the vicar be the  person entitle to the per annum and not choose to teach the school himself pay  it to this poor man as his deputy which can not gain a settlement for any  person whatever so the order be quash Mr Gundry Mr ford and Mr willmot of  counsel for sheehead sir John strange and Floyd for Milburn
between the parish OF Southwold and Yoxford in suffolk poor burr set can SC  Sess can p No S c upon a special order of session it be state that the pauper  take a house at Southwold at the rend of l per annum the landlord agree to  build a stable washhouse c to it that the real value when take be but l S per  annum and the landlord never make the new erection but if they have be make it  will have be worth l per annum and the court hold this no settlement vide king  v western burr SC
between the parish OF STOKEPRIOR and the inhabitant OF the manor OF Grafton  five house in a extra parochial place do not constitute a ville burr Sett can  and Sess can Edward vol p No SC ante a poor person be remove to Grafton and on  appeal it be state to be a extraparochial place former a seat of the earl of  Shrewsbury consist of a capital message and three lodge in the park but since  convert into five house and farm and the session adjudge it a ville that ought  to maintain its own poor this be move to be quash upon the authority of the  case of Denham v Dalham hill Geo and a rule be make to show cause afterward on  a affidavit of service the rule be make absolute this not appear to have the  reputation of a ville
between the parish OF TEELBY and WILLERTON Sess can p No SC Certificatemen not  removable till actual Chargeable so hold mich Geo parish of Brocton and  Eastwoodhay so salk may become Chargeable in a order of removal Mod Cas salk  the justice remove a certificate woman be likely to become Chargeable et per  curian by W c she be not removable till she actual become Chargeable and the  order be quash in another order the justice adjudge that a person may become  Chargeable et per curian this be not sufficient for the statute only enable  the justice to remove person likely to become Chargeable for a man of the  great estate may possible one time or other become Chargeable though it be  very unlikely and be such a person removable there be as much difference in  this case between may and likely as between a possibility and a probability
between the parish OF Tetbury and ilam b r there must be a hire either  absolute or conditional for a year and a service for a year to gain a  settlement rule to show cause why a order of two justice confirm by the  session to remove a pauper from Tetbury to Ilam shall not be quash the order  state that Mr pope of Ilam hear the pauper be a boy likely to be fit for his  service send to his father to desire he may come upon like the boy come and  continue upon like eight week and then it state that Mr pope hire he for a  year to commence from the beginning of the eight week he have be on like and  that the boy continue in Mr pope service at Ilam a year and ten day from his  first come upon like per curian this case differ from all the case a come upon  like be not like a conditional hire at the first there must be a hire for a  year either absolute or conditional previous to the service for a year the  hire here have a retrospect to pass like and the court hold the pauper gain no  settlement at Ilam and quash the order of the justice and session
between the parish OF Westham and Chiddingstone woman settlement before  marriage remain if husband have no settlement Fol Bott pl SC mich Geo in it  paroch Dunkswell and Upotery Sess Cas SC hold so likewise Sess Cas S p it be  state that a single woman settle at c be marry to a man who be since dead but  his settlement do not appear et per curian her settlement before marriage  stand Reg v Wilsborough green Fol Shadwell v saint John Wapping andr king v  Norton burr SC king v saint Botolph Bishopsgate ib S p
between the parish OF WHADDINGTON and Tedford in lincolnshire though part of  the purchase money be advance by another yet if there be no fraud a settlement  may be gain on Geo c burr Sett can and Sess can Edward vol p No S c on a  special order of session it be state that the pauper contract for the purchase  of a house in Whaddington for l and pay l out of his own money and the remain  l be by his order pay by another person to who the premise be mortgage for it  that the pauper have live upon it four year when the mortgage be foreclose and  he turn out and the question be whether he have gain a settlement hereby the  session adjudge that this be a fraudulent purchase and consequent no  settlement gain thereby say per curian the order must be quash the purchase  money by Geo c need only be l and the advance the money by another make no  alteration and the fact be special state we can judge as well as the session  whether it be fraudulent or not the circumstance of his continue four year  ousts all presumption of fraud vide the distinction between a case where fraud  be find general and where the fact be special state and a conclusion of fraud  be draw from they by the justice most clear explain by Lord Hardwicke in this  case burr SC king v woodland term Rep parish of saint Maurice v parish of  saint mary calendar in Winchester strange er report date between the parish OF  saint Maurice and saint mary calendar in winchester execute office of  constable settle certificateman burr Sett can and Sess can Edward vol No Bott  by Const pl SC and much full ante upon a special order of session it be hold  that execute the office of constable in the city at large give a  certificateman a settlement in that parish where he inhabit though he be  appoint by the corporation in general and act through all the parish in the  city for be execute a annual office in the parish which be the word of the  statute
between the parish OF Wingham and Sellindge in ken a certificateman must be  swear into a office else he gain no settlement by execute it burr Sett can  more perfect S c it be state in a special order that a certificateman have  notice that he be appoint borsholder never take the oath of office but once  execute a warrant of a justice direct to the borsholder and this the session  determine to be gain a settlement within the W c say per curian the order must  be quash for the word of the Act be be legal place in such office that be be  the officer both de facto and de jure which this man be not the order state  negative that he be not legal place therein which can only be by a appointment  and swear in it be also state negative that there be no presentment of jury of  the leet vide king v Winterbow burr SC Bl Rep
between the parish OF Wookey and hinton Blewet where a person settle in a have  a estate descend to he in b he can be send thither though if he be there he  will be irremovable a person settle at Hinton Blewet have a estate descend to  he in Wookey whereupon the justice send he thither as to the place of his last  settlement et per curian the order quash for it be no settlement nor  inhabitation though if ha shall go thither he can not be remove it may be a  great injury to send he away from a good trade in h to perhaps half a acre of  land wherein he have but a term
between they cease equity case abridge and acquiesce to the time of his death  the court dismiss the bill and leave the plaintiff to recover at law if she  can Sherman and Sherman mich vern
between William hide plaintiff William foster and John Myers and other  defendant Lord chancellor Monday the that day of August in the that year of  the reign of his majesty king George the second upon open of the matter this  present day unto the right honourable the Lord high chancellor c by Mr green  be of counsel with the plaintiff it be allege that in Hilary term the  plaintiff exhibit his bill in this court against the defendant to be relieve  touch the several matter therein complain of that the defendant foster be  before the time of fill the bill and be now at Jamaica where he reside that  the defendant Myers have put in his answer to the say bill and thereby set  forth that he be factor or agent for the defendant foster here in England and  that by virtue of some power or authority from the defendant foster who be now  at Jamaica he have be for some time pass and be now in the possession and  receipt of the rend and profit of certain chamber in Bernard inn for the use  of the say defendant foster which be part of the premise in question in this  cause and therefore it be pray that service of a subpoena to appear in this  cause on the defendant Myers as agent or factor for the defendant foster may  be deem good service of the defendant foster whereupon and upon hear of Mr  brown and Mr jewel of counsel with the defendant the answer of the defendant  Myers read and what be allege by the counsel on both side his lordship do  order that service of a subpoena to appear in this cause on the say defendant  Myers as agent or factor for the defendant foster be good service on the say  defendant Foster A fol
betwixt the parish OF eling and thistleworth Friday April poor car c resolve  by the major part of thirteen justice in hicksshall session that h be a labour  man and have a abode at t go for work videlicet to make brick with his family  to e and there die both t and e also be in the same county of Middlesex his  family shall be keep by t although his employment last long then that season  as well as if he have only remove to a harvest or such like work Keble de  boundary paschae foster chief justice mallet Twisden Windham
beum against Felton a ejection firm be bring of acre of land acre of meadow  acre of pasture and the jury find the ejectment only in close call black acre  and wh acre parcel of the say land and by the court the verdict be nought and  that the plaintiff shall have another judgement for the judgement ought to be  accord to the declaration of the plaintiff and his demand and it do not appear  of how Noy much execution may be make also it may be that those two close  contain more than be in the declaration and by the court a venire fac de to  make new be award
BEURGE and shepherd ante legacy assumpsit in consideration the plaintiff will  be content to accept S for a legacy due to Ann ad tunc wife the defendant  promise to pay after verdict it be except on Yelverton that it do not appear  the wife be alive at the time when the action be bring which by Twisden be ill  but by wile curian the consideration be the be content and it appear the wife  be alive at the time of the promise she shall not be intend dead after nor no  matter if she be say adjornatur
Bevan against jones trinity geo the court be of opinion that after execution  execute though the judgement be for a penalty they have not jurisdiction at  commonlaw or by statute to refer to the prothonotary to examine into the sum  due for principal interest and cost and into the quantum levy and to order  restitution of the overplus without consent but defendant must seek relief in  a court of equity rule to show cause discharge Belfield for defendant birch  for plaintiff
Bevan versus dike novemb relief on matter not in issue the plaintiff wife and  administratrix to her former husband sue dike mortgagee of a dyehouse and  vessel but the Administration be repeal because she be marry as it be say at  the bar by a nonconformist minister but it be but say and as to that say the  chancellor say it may be allow as well as by a Romish priest or he say to the  like effect but nothing prove the Cause be hear the court in regard of the  repeal of the Administration can not relieve her but in the proof it appear  she have another Title not set forth in the bill nor put in the issue  videlicet that the mortgagor before witness give S d to the heir and declare  that the plaintiff shall sell the house pay the mortgage and with the house  and Trade of die maintain herself and child so that it be a parole declaration  of a trust object it be not allege nor in issue therefore c chancellor where I  see right I will have it try ere I decree against it and it be no  inconvenience for the inconvenience be because the other side can examine to  what be not allege in the bill but at the trial he may and so direct a trial  on that point
Bevan versus PROTHESK Rec fa loq stay all further proceed in a countycourt if  deliver after interlocutory but before final judgement in a long motion about  the stay of proceed in a inferior court this court hold that the delivery of a  to think over facias speech to the clerk of a countycourt after interlocutory  burrow judgement and before final judgement be a stop to all further proceed  in that court they likewise hold that the officer of the inferior court can  not refuse pay obedience to the writ under pretence of his fee not be pay to  he for he be oblige to obey the writ and have a proper remedy which he may  take for such fee as be due to he
bevel v manor in bevel case versus manor wife be in remainder entail with fee  expectant and sue for the deed of entail which be in the lady bevel hand be  tenant in jointure it be doubt whether upon conveyance by use the deed shall  go to beneficiary use or the feoff and by the attorney strong to the feoff but  the Lord chancellor be contrary and at last order that the heir at commonlaw  choice case in chancery er p videlicet bevel shall have all deed whereby he  may vouch or rebut but not of warranties against himself for maintenance of  the jointure and it appear not whether the Joynturewere life or in fee April
Beverley versus power pardon upon a assembly this term of all the justice at  sergeant inue by virtue of a order of the starchamber make the last term at  read the case be James Beverly be plaintiff against Robert power and mary  Beverley and other which bill be exhibit hill James and the bill be for  scandalous matter not examinable in this court and for other matter which be  examinable and witness examine and publish and then the of fever James the  generali pardon be make by parliament by which all offence contempt and  misdemeanour Hutton deal December before except such offence contempt c  whereof or for which any suit or bill within eight year before be exhibit into  the starchamber and there remain to be prosecute this last day of this present  parliament and afterward videlicet mich I caroli the cause come to hear at the  suit of the defendant and upon the hear power be fine two hundred pound and  for the abuse and contempt to the court for exhibit the scandalous matter the  plaintiff be fine five hundred pound and for damage to the defendant five  hundred mark and yet because of the difficulty and diversity of opinion which  be between the Lord chief justice and the Lord Hobart the now Lord keeper and  the lord by a order respite this matter as to the fido of the plaintiff and  give damage to the defendant and refer it to the opinion of all the justice  and they all One voice except justice Harvey who insist upon the damage give  to the party that they shall not be pardon agree that the contempt and offence  for the scandalous bill exhibit be pardon and not within the exception for it  can be intend that the plaintiff exhibit a bill upon which he himself shall be  fine but this exception be of that which be lie to the charge of the defendant  and the defendant may have his remedy at commonlaw and the contempt which be  accidental to the offence be pardon and by consequence the fine pasch car
BEVERSHAM against osborne debt for rend plead a preparation to be to loosen  without to bring before S c I vent keb debt for rend the defendant plead  action non e because to say c when it become d tie a preparation to be thus  far a preparation step forth to loosen profert hic in cur the money the  plaintiff demurrer and the plea be adjudge ill because he do not plead a to  bring before the plea be not to the action but only in excuse of damage Qucere  of the first reason for rend be demandable otherwise of a sum in gross which  be Payable without demand
BEVERSHAM against SPRINGHOLD February injunction not to prove a will in the  spiritual court a perpetual injunction award against the defendant not to  prove a will touch a personal estate only in the prerogative court but note  that in this case it be direct by this court to be try at law whether a will  or no and find against the will and then this injunction be award the Lord  chancellor
BEVERSHAM and osborn ante tender in debt for rend the defendant plead he be  always ready and yet be bring the money into the court to which the plaintiff  demurrer because no demand be necessary where there be a time and place  certain and so be Inst and   especial this be no plea in bar as here but only  in excuse of damage also to say he be always ready a holiday and do not say at  the feast the defendant agree its no plea in bar but in excuse of damage it be    entry and raze roll damage and Inst and Edward and Edward and Keble er p  tender Br but per curian on Edward there must be a to bring before uncore  priest as to the duty it self and by wile justice as to debt and damage where  its for duty at a certain day tout temps priest be not sufficient and  judgement for the plaintiff Keble church notam that the opinion of c b be say  to be that the spiritual court may grant sequestration upon impropriate  parsonage for not repair the chancel of the church quaere if they can do it  for not repair the parsonagehouse but clear they may excommunicate the  impropriator for both notwithstanding the statute of dissolution h cap c
BEVERSHAM and osborn pa car two ante pl in debt for rend as to part nil debet  there be nolle attendance as to the rest there be a tender plead without any  demand or to bring before to which the plaintiff demurrer because its not say  the defendant be ready at the place where the land lie and that the plaintiff  come not holt on Edward tout temps priest be sufficient to put the obligee to  a request for the plaintiff can have damage and cost without and issue may be  thereon raze Entr in debt for a certain duty where damage be accessary tout  temps priest bring in the money as here its plead I roll Abr and I Inst and  Edward tender Br hob the plaintiff shall never have damage without demand of  the rend this be plead before imparlance and all the book h that say that the  rend be not parable raze Entr   Entr without demand be not law unless this be  a good plea Keble er p which the court agree but for a penalty there must be a  demand but wile incline the tenant ought to tender et adjornatur
BEVERSHAM and osborn payment in debt for rend before imparlance the defendant  plead he be always and yet be ready to pay as   Entr and h to which the  plaintiff demurrer be not say to bring before nor uncore priest and the court  incline there ought to be a to bring before or uncore priest say adjornatur pl
bevin against CHAPHAN ante pl Tuesday No day in action upon the case on  promise to pay so many reyals to part the defendant plead non assumpsit as to  the residue the statute of limitation the plaintiff reply that at the time the  plaintiff and defendant be in Spain and that such a day he come over and enter  plaint in the sheriff court which be of record and remove it hither by habeas  corpus and here declare to which the defendant demurrer because the  indebitatus be lie to arise in London and in the replication say it arise at  teneriff in warda predict also where the debt arise beyond sea and six year  there pass its not within the statute which the court deny and by Windham at  teneriff in parochian predict shall be intend in London and so no departure  also a cause begin below and continue hither by habeas corpus be a suit within  six year although the declaration here be after six year which hide agree but  Twisden doubt the say h be at teneriff beyond sea in warda praeedict be void  and repugnant in plea but I agree that for visne it may be lie but by Symson  in tailor against reins the time or place be resolve last term immaterial and  that the plaintiff may pursue the defendant plea also the defendant Keble er p  may traverse that teneriff be not in warda predict and the defendant shall  never by his plea make that necessary and local that be but form and  transitory but by Windham however the old book be of late the plaintiff may  vary as in assumpsit lie twenty year the defendant can demurrer but must plead  non assumpsit infra sex aged and then the plaintiff may show cause of action  accrueing within four year judgement for the plaintiff nisi
Bevis vers Lindsell after judgement by default a promissory note set out in  the declaration need not be prove in assumpsit upon a promissory note there be  judgement by default and on execute a writ of inquiry the plaintiff do not  produce the subscribe witness but offer other evidence of its be the defendant  hand and the court hold this be sufficient for the note be set out in the  declaration be admit and the only use of produce it be to see whether any  money be endorse to be pay upon it mill v line b r h Geo Bayley on bill Appen  No anon will green v hearne term Rep that ace billers et all v Bowles Barnes  Ellis v wall ib contra
BEVYNE against clapham day Siderf pl in indebitatus lie at bow in London the  defendant plead the stat of Timit the plaintiff reply that the debt arise  beyond sea and that within six year after return he prosecute in inferior  court in London within six year which per curian hide and Keeling absentib be  well enough and no departure but a sufficient prosecution be remove bither on  demurrer by William for the defendant Adjornatur pl
BEZALIEL knight case SC salk holt if a defendant plead a misnomer and the  plaintiff without discontinue that action bring another against he by his  right name for the same cause he may plead the pendency of the other action to  it in abatement SC salk and the plaintiff can avoid the effect of such plea by  enter a discontinuance to the first action a action be bring against he by a  wrong name and he plead it in abatement thereupon without more the plaintiff  declare against he de to make new by his right name and he plead that action  pendent c for the plaintiff ought to have discontinue his first action and  holt chief justice say it be too late to do it now because the discontinuance  only relate to the time of its be enter upon the record so that if the  plaintiff shall now enter it and reply nul tiel record it Acc ante a will be  against he because it be a record at the time of the plea plead and it be not  like the reverse a judgement or outlawry on a writ of error which avoid the  record ab beginning so that on nul tiel record if the judgement be reverse  before the day give to bring in the record itAcc ante b be sufficient
bias and wife and GOODFLESH against Lyall mich geo the rule to show cause why  proceed shall not be stay be discharge draper for plaintiff Hayward for  defendant vide this case Trin Geo
bibi v HUXLEV eoden die whether beech be esteem timber in Com Bedford in a  bill for tithe of wood by the rector of Whipmeed in the county of Bedford the  question be whether beech be esteem timber in this county which go to a issue  to try vide the case cite blow Com inn Com sur Le stat Ed stat Henry cro James  more cro Ro Abr p I Inst Com dig Bac Abr burr
BICARD against Payton Encumbent roll pound Edward in averment contra on  recovery in London and no one good return but that he be clergyman status of  pertaining to a favor  in the diocese of Ely and thereupon go a be made fa to  the bishop of Ely on a testatum and he return that he have no ecclesiastical  good which as h h be not good but he ought to return a sequestration have  admit he to be clergyman status of pertaining to a favor  but be be not estopt  to say he be not clergyman status of pertaining to a favor  by the return of  the sheriff which per martial pro defendant be ill and he must return a  sequestration or that he be not clergyman status of pertaining to a favor   within his diocese the court agree the become facias well direct to the bishop  and not to the sheriff but they conceive this a good return and that the  plaintiff may have his action sur case if faux see p Edward b seu b
bick against edward common action upon the case by commoner for restrain his  common which he claim by custom to tenement for all cattle levant and couchant  not say the cattle be levant and couchant on the tenement to which he claim it  as appendant after verdict William move this exception in arrest of judgement  but the court think it well enough as stone and Mussendens case where it be  hold on demurrer to be nought but after verdict it be well enough but by  William this case differ in that the plaintiff have prescribe only for beast  levant and couchant and therefore ought to aver the beast he put into the  common that be restrain be such say adjornatur
BICKERSTAF and pierce executor debt against the defendant by the plaintiff and  his wife as executor of one clerk on judgement for damage and cost allege that  the say jane have after the judgement marry quidam Johan Bickerstaf without  day or place the defendant after imparlance plead ne unquen accouple in  abatement to which the plaintiff demurrer and Keble now Mr attorney Jones on  dyer pi say that quidam must be intend a stranger and so the plaintiff not  well entitle which the court agree and rather because baron and feme plead it  and the plea be agree ill the marriage be traversable and the plaintiff have  leave to discontinue
Bickerstaff against PURDIEU ante Siderf pl administrator in debt by  administrator on lease for year make by the testator to I S by virtue of which  he be possess the reversion ind to the plaintiff on nil to hold off and  verdict for the plaintiff wile in arrest of judgement move that it do not  appear what estate the intestate have in reversion either in fee or long term  for year but by goodfellow after verdict it be aid by army pron  interrog  as  Anderss case   assignment by lessee except the tree dyer Cr h pl com Grendons  case in that it be say the lessee enter adbue to hold off Windham conceive  this action favour and the omission of a mean assignment of the defendant well  enough and per curian the title of the plaintiff be sufficient find
Bickerton against lewis after a appearance enter for defendant by plaintiff  accord to the statute the clerk of defendant agent take the declaration out of  the office and the clerk of plaintiff agent have notice thereof and as the  clerk of defendant agent swear undertake not to sign judgement without call  for a plea notwithstanding which judgement be sign without such call the clerk  of plaintiff agent deny the undertake the court think the judgement not fair  though regular and make the rule absolute for set it aside on payment of cost  and plead the general issue draper for defendant prime for plaintiff
Bickerton executor OF AUDLY against BONESOY Friday No limitation Twisden and  the court conceive that in action upon the case on a promise to pay where the  defendant plead the statute of limitation and that be after waive plead non  assumpsit before which the plaintiff do make it to give satisfaction on which  issue be take that this be but a jeoffail for to loosen be only of the money  but to give satisfaction may be any other way but the plaintiff have amend his  declaration while in paper before issue non assumpsit plead for the defendant  and make it to give satisfaction all be well the second consideration be if  the plaintiff will forbear that then if she do ever pay such a debt the  defendant will pay which by wile Keble er p in arrest of judgement be ill in  that averment be only of a forbearance to a particular day whereas the  defendant be to be total forbear which the court agree on demurrer but after  verdict the court will by hide and Keeling intend it good as in arbitrement of  all cause to the day of the award on submission to the day of the bind the  defendant must show any cause new arise but Twisden and Windham contra the  plaintiff here ought to entitle himself by the forbearance which as this case  be ought rather to be intend till the payment of the other debt of senior then  absolute as if there be no reference of the forbearance at all also by hide  the executor be suable although no recovery can he have against he and so the  original action be go but by consent the plaintiff take judgement for security  and go to new trial
Bickerton v Bickerton equity case abridge er report date a bill be bring to  discover who be tenant of the freehold in order to bring a formedon to which  there be a demurrer and it be allow hill Stapleton and Sherrard vern though  the case of Bickerton and Bickerton be quote to the contrary vide caryi where  it be say that such bill have be frequent
Bickley and Bickley how far the court will not set aside a verdict for a  variance between the record of the nisi prius and the copy of the issue Mr  draper move to set aside a verdict for a variance between the copy of the  issue and the declaration deliver there be no defence make at the trial the  action be a quantum to deserve for board and the variance insist upon be that  in the issue it be lie that the money be not pay in the declaration that it be  pay but the court say that they refuse this same motion last term because the  variance be between the declaration and the issue and not the nisi prius roll  and the issue the chief justice say he take the reason for this distinction to  be that the party have waive this benefit of a variance by accept of the copy  of the issue the case here refer to be the case of Bradford and more the  variance there be that in the declaration it be lie prediction Henry but in  the copy of the issue it be lie Henry general Mr marsh in that case obtain a  rule to show cause why the verdict shall not be set aside though the court  incline against he and when Mr Kettleby come to discharge the rule he mention  the case of come and Lord Tankerville in point against Mr march and upon that  the motion be there waive upon a proposal however in the present case for  another reason the court make a rule to show cause
Bickley and Bickley vide ante the cause upon which the former rule be obtain  be that the damage be excessive the damage give be per annum for three year  only for bare lodging and diet for himself without a servant the witness  indeed do swear the plaintiff deserve as much but they be only the plaintiff  servant and therefore not so proper judge and upon this Mr lee now move that  the rule may be absolute Mr marsh on the other side object that the verdict be  exact accord to evidence that the defendant offer no evidence to lessen the  damage swear to and therefore the present motion be irregular he say beside  the defendant have actual prefer a bill in equity to be relieve against this  verdict and that be another reason why this court will do nothing in it the  chief justice say if there have be a special agreement the servant will have  be proper evidence of that but he do not think they be so fit judge in the  present case accord the court grant a new trial
Bicknal versus Tucker Trin James rotulo in a replevin the case be whether a  fine with five year will bind the copyholder in remainder there be a copyhold  grant to three for life to have and to hold successive the first have the fee  hold grant to he by the lord of the manor and then he levy a fine and five  year pass whether he in the remainder be bar or no those who estate be turn to  right either present or future be mean by the statute to be bar if a  copyholder for year be put out of possession and a fine levy and no entry by  he he be bar by the statute by the bargain and sale he in remainder be not put  Brownlow goldsborough er p out of possession if a man make a lease to begin at  easter next and before easter a fine be levy and five year pass this fine will  not bar because at the levy of the fine be can not enter for then be right be  future if the lease have be in possession and the lessee have never enter he  have be bar a lease for year remainder for year if the first man take for life  the first estate be not so determine but that the remainder stand if a  copyholder surrender for life there passes no more from he than so much as  make the estate and no more and the rest remain in he demand of rend service  upon the land sufficient
BICKNER versus wright case for make conyboroughs in a commonprescription for  common help a action upon the case be bring by Richard Bickner against John  wright for the make of a conyborough in damage of his common the plaintiff  prescribe to have common omni tempore striving and say not whithersoever you  please year and after verdict adjudge good trin James
BIDDLESTON versus Atcherley east geo ill prac ring S c to plead in abatement  within four day after declaration deliver or leave in the office Vid holdfast  v Carlton ante p cook in this cause a motion be make to set aside the  judgement which have be sign after a plea in abatement be deliver it appear  that the declaration cook c p be deliver the eight of February and the plea in  abatement not deliver till the fourteenth of February and it be insist on the  part of the plaintiff that this plea in abatement be plead after the time  limit by the rule of the court and be therefore irregular for that it ought to  have be plead within four day after the declaration deliver or leave in the  office and can not afterward be plead of which opinion be the court and  therefore the motion cook c p er p be deny and the resolution in the Anonymous  case ante p be establish where it be hold that such plea be void if not  deliver within four day after declaration deliver or notice of declaration  serve even though no rule to plead be give
BIDDOLPH all versus brown hill I geo two venue change to the city of London  Vid gardener v Forbes ante p and case there cite a motion to change the venue  from the county of Middlesex to London on affidavit that the cause of action  if any arise in London and the court order the cook c p er p venue to be  change for London have always be consider in this respect as a county at large  and such motion have usual be grant though not to any other city or town which  be a county of itself
BIDDULF and Harrison Thursday November hill pound car two rot abatement error  of fine be assign first in the death of two of the four conusors which by wile  justice be in roe and Evelies case adjudge error as to all in real action and  recovery be thereby whole reverse so on the death of one conusor after testae  and before the return of the writ of covenant Rainsford agree the last error  but the first only error pro tanto in a fine though in recovery it be in toto  and reverse nisi
BIDDULFE and Harrison Thursday February ante fine error of a fine levy on writ  of covenant testae December returnable in hill term after postea in pasch  concession think over hale chief justice say this be use only of fine that be  acknowledge at the end of the precedent term not to have a term intermit but  this be only a voidable writ not void as in case of a death of two conusees  coheir of Goodier be in march intermediate and Newdigate pray judgement to be  total reverse this fine be plead in bar of arrear before Harrison purchase of  sir h Goodier hale chief justice say distress since the fine be avoid by the  fine reverse but if the distress be before the fine it stand and all the  arrear before the fine by reversal set up again as to the heir of Goodier  which the court agree praeter wile who hold the arrear extinct and not revive  no more than forfeiture but no rule till notice to Jennings guardian of the  tenant in possession a infant
Biddulph against Harrison one conusor in a fine die before king silver pay S c  keb error of a fine levy by four conusors and assign the death of two before  the fine ingross or king silver pay and whether the fine shall be reverse in  toto or only quoad they two be the question and Newdigate sergeant argue it  shall be reverse in toto because the writ abate and so it be a fine without  original and cite hill b r rot roe against Yeatly to be so adjudge
Biddulph versus Dashwood lev e f b see salk in a action of debt for l the  plaintiff declare quod cum recuperasset in person justice de banc at  Westminster l pro dadadamn against the defendant prout per record process who  dom king queen in person the dawn causan wandering in eisd corrigend venire  fac who in cur speech domini king dom Reginee in plene oak vigor remanent too  little call back plan that this only is apparent per quod action to grow  progressively c to this the defendant demurrer suppose that the judgement be  suspend so far that a action of debt can not be bring upon it pen the writ of  error but the court hold if the defendant can insist upon this he ought not to  have demurrer but to have plead special and demand judgement if the plaintiff  shall be answer pen the writ of error so judgement be give for the plaintiff  so if he have plead in bar of abatement that a writ of error have be pen the  plea not be good show roll Abr Ventris boundary consecrated HILLARII year W m  in common banc
bident versus take hill James rotulo action of covenant bring to discharge the  plaintiff of a single bill in which he be bind for the debt of the defendant  and he allege for breach nonpayment and a suit and recovery at law for the  money which remain in force the defendant plead that he pay the money at the  day and thereof give the plaintiff notice before the purchase his writ the  plaintiff demurrer and the court hold the plea nought and judgement for the  plaintiff action upon account release can be give in evidence upon a plea that  the defendant be never a receiver of the plaintiff money
BIDLAND against king cost Stroud pray that the defendant may not wave his  demurrer or that the rule make general for payment of cost may extend to cost  in equity send non allocatur for per curian the secondary of b r can tax cost  of another court unless by special consent and this be in debt on obligation
big against caley h James c b rot p bring a action of trespass against c for  take his horse c c say that he be seize of the manor of d to which p be a  villain regardant and that he and all those c have be seize of the plaintiff  and his ancestor the plaintiff say that he be free c without hoc that the  defendant c be seize of the plaintiff c as of villain regardant and the issue  be find for the plaintiff and upon motion in arrest of judgement it be rule  that the traverse be well take note dyer accord and by Hubbard if a man have  not seize of a villain in gross within year he shall be bar by h of limitation  in that has arisen by birth to have for liberty be favour but yet of a villain  regardant the seize of the manor to who c be sufficient seize of the villain  note it be say by Hubbard chief justice and winch but Warberton be of the  contrary that if a man have a licence of forestal upon the e he need but only  recite the statute e in his plead without plead Elizabeth for the licence be  ground only upon e and the Elizabeth only qualify the person note that in the  argument of a case at bar Leonards case p Elizabeth be vouch lessor for year  grant to the lessee by parole to feoff grant bargain sell and confirm to the  lessee in fee with a letter of attorney in the same deed to make livery and  seize the need be deliver to the lessee but no liver and seize be make and  adjudge that the reversion do not pass for the intent of the lessor appear to  pass that by livery and seize we dyer Noy er p
big against gardener the court of Ely be as a superior court side error be  assign of a judgement in Ely court first for that in the style of the court it  be not show whether it be hold by charter or prescription second the judgement  be to look at closely be and not say per cur three the writ of inquiry of  damage be per sacrament dvodecim c and not say estimable of man but all the  exception be overrule for it be a royal franchise it be not as in case of  inferior court and afterward this same term in another case between peacock  and bell in error of a judgement in assumpsit in Ely court it be assign that  it be not say that the good for which the action be bring be sell and deliver  within the jurisdiction of the court and yet the judgement be affirm because  it be not as in case of inferior court
big c GOLDSBURG the Frederick and the Felton collision a sentence similar to  that in the last case be make in the follow case on the same day there be no  appeal Johannes Pigg senior Nathaniel carter eage et associate recently  proprietarii ship cujusdam recently peremptory or urgent call the Frederick  pron  interrog  Johannes Carleton recently to be magister ejusque c et will do  you much good recently in eaden onustor contra naven quandan peremptory or  urgent call the Felton pron  interrog  Samuel Goldsburg junior be magister  ejusque c nor contra dictum S Goldsburg et associate pro interest nest to come  between
big versus malin in case upon assumpsit against executor it be not necessary  to allege asset big bring a action upon the case against Malin as  administrator and count that whereas the having made no will be indebt to he  in ten pound and the defendant also be indebt to he in forty shilling they  account and upon account the debt be twelve pound the defendant be  administrator do assume and promise to pay it et although smpius require non  to loosen and upon non assumpsit plead the verdict be find for the plaintiff  and by finch it be move in arrest of judgement that the plaintiff have not  show in this count sufficient consideration to charge the defendant because  that it do not appear that the defendant have asset but the court disallow  that for if that be necessary it ought to be presume to be find in the verdict  v apres as in the case in consideration that the plaintiff have sell and  deliver to he twenty quarter of good and merchantable barley the defendant  promise to pay Hutton he twenty pound non assumpsit the plaintiff ought to  prove the promise and the delivory and as in debt against Hutton er p executor  upon a simple contract it shall not need to be allege that they have asset to  pay debt by specialty yet good and that ought to be prove but it seem to be  agree that if a executor or administrator which have not asset make promise of  payment if it be not mix with any profit to himself videlicet forbearance c  there it shall not charge he but by Warburton if a executor have fifty pound  asset and he promise to pay to a creditor a hundred pound that shall bind he  for all for when he have asset for part the plaintiff have judgement for all  and execution only for so much as be find and in this case the plaintiff ld  judgement
biggen and bridge ante day Conyers on Cr humble and fisher conceive that to  enjoy from the d of Feb usque holiday saint mich be exclusive of the Feast of  saint mich so Yelverton especial on demise of tithe holt for the plaintiff  Michaelmas must come before the rend be due and albeit the rend be Payable  twenty one day after yet these twenty one day be not Allowable for the last  day but its Payable on saint mich as a rend in debt on obligation condition to  enjoy pay the rend c Twisden and wile incline this be ill but condition to pay  rend will include the day say adjornatur
biggin and bridge ante tithe debt on obligation the condition peaceable to  enjoy from the I of February usque mich tithe pay half yearly during the term  and on default of payment the defendant to be free from all obligation to the  plaintiff repeat be assign breach in nonpayment of rend at Michaelmas which by  consequence be after the term end and so the defendant demurrer because the  last day be no part of the demise Cr usque be exclusive of the last day and on  a lease at will Yelverton the declaration in debt be on entry from Michaelmas  one year usque and upon post mich in another year the substance of the suit be  quiet enjoyment therefore ought not to be take by protestation send per curian  enjoyment need not be answer where its defeasanced by payment of the rend  usque in plead be take strict but Leonard pl not so in agreement and contract  of party so for way from a to b the indictment be exclusive of both but  ordinary indictment be inclusive but   Berwicks and foster be against   Cluns  case yet judgement for the defendant
biggin and bridge tithe on demise of tithe debt on obligation to pay so much  at Michaelmas next and so much at ladyday follow and so much half yearly  during the term which be from the that of February until Michaelmas proviso  that on default of payment that the lessor be free of obligation and grant to  the plaintiff and breech assign in nonpayment at Michaelmas to which the  plaintiff demurrer because not within the term but by Twisden in contract the  intent be sufficient and shall include the day and in the earl of  Northumberland case on demise at will and rend half yearly army pron   interrog  the lessee enter and enjoy usque Michaelmas which Keble er p be hold  to include michaelmasday this day be as a indivisible point and not like a  indictment of repair way from such a place usque such a place which the court  agree be the last term albeit it be to pay at Michaelmas or within day after  yet the last rend be not lose say adjornatur
BIGNAL v Brereton et e contra Reg lib a fol July anon Ves S c interest refuse  on arrear of annuity though interest be reserve by the decree by the decree  date that march it be refer to master old to make a account of what be due to  the plaintiff in the second cause for principal and interest on her two legacy  of pound and pound and also a account of what be due to the defendant  Sharpless for principal and interest on his mortgage and to tax these his cost  and the master be also to take a account of what be due to the plaintiff for  the arrear of their respective annuity accrue since Michaelmas and by consent  of the mortgagee the estate be to be sell and direction be give for payment of  what shall be find due on the mortgage on the legacy and for the arrear of the  say annuity and the consideration of interest on the arrear of the plaintiff  annuity be reserve dickens er p dickens on that of may the master certify  among other thing that he have take a account of what be due for the arrear of  the plaintiff respective annuity from Michaelmas be thirteen year and a half  and that such arrear amount to pound S the master then state that the estate  have be sell pursuant to the decree and that the purchase money have be lie  out in bank annuity in the name of the accountant general on the saint July  the cause come on for further direction and as to the matter of interest  reserve by the decree but Lord Hardwicke c will not give interest on the  arrear of the annuity but only direct the master to compute subsequent  interest on such of the party debt and legacy whereon interest have already be  compute
BIGNOLL versus rogers mich W case W in debt against sheriff of buck for the  reward give by the statute W m to those that shall discover and convict  crimpers and coiner the plaintiff have a certificate from Lord chief justice  holt who try the malefactor of his have be convict on the plaintiff evidence  which be produce it be prove by my lord clerk to the jury and here holt c j  hold the demand of this debt of the sheriff after the certificate do attach  the debt upon he and that the money be to be pay out of the profit of his  county or upon failure thereof out of the exchequer and that in such case the  action will lie against the sheriff executor because give by Act of parliament  and attach in the testator but for the penalty give by the Act against the  sheriff for default of payment that shall not affect the executor and that if  the sheriff pay the debt and die it shall be allow to his executor
BILFOORD plaintiff against flint defendant enter mich James b r rot a action  of debt for not perform a award in a action bring for nonperformance of a  award make the case appear to be this the defendant show how that he the  plaintiff have submit themselves Bulstrode er p unto the award of f concern a  battery by the plaintiff upon he who do award the defendant to release the  action and the plaintiff to pay unto he S in satisfaction for the battery the  plaintiff set forth the breach in this for that he tender the release to the  defendant and he refuse to seal it per quod action to grow progressively the  defendant say that be refuse to seal it because the plaintiff have not pay  unto he the S award unto he in satisfaction for the battery so that the  question only be whether the release of the action or the payment of the S  shall precede Haughton justice the release here be to be of the action of  battery and the payment of the S be to be in satisfaction for the battery  Dodderidg justice the release be to be only of this action of battery not to  be a general release of all other matter as the defendant suppose if the award  have be for one to pay money the other to make a release here the payment of  the money ought to precede the release but in this principal case here the  release be only of the battery and not of the payment of the S the court clear  of opinion that here be a good breach and the same can be help for by this  release which be tender by the plaintiff to the defendant to seal accord to  the award the payment of the S be not by you discharge and therefore the seal  of the release be tender to the Bulstrode defendant ought to precede because  this release go only to discharge the action as to the battery and his refusal  to seal this be a clear breach and so the plaintiff have just cause of action  and by the rule of the court judgement be give and so enter for the plaintiff
bill against a executrix to have a account of asset and satisfaction of a debt  of pound secure by judgement against the testator allege a devastavit c the  defendant by schedule set forth the asset and deny by her answer any waste and  for plea to any relief say that her testator be in execution on the say  judgement in his lifetime and be discharge from thence by the express order of  the plaintiff and therefore plead such discharge in bar such discharge be a  release oh the debt both in law and equity and the plea be allow easter Geo  Beatniff and gardener pale yellow Eq Rep equity case abridge er p
bill against bill trin geo a nonpros for want of a declaration be sign in  prothonotary Borretts office which be set aside as irregular Mr Laremore  plaintiff attorney be a practiser in cook office the rule to declare must  always be give in that prothonotarys office where plaintiff attorney be enter  though a declaration be duly demand that be not sufficient to support the  nonpros unless the rule be give in the proper office Bootle for plaintiff  chapel for defendant
bill against neal ante judgement Lindl move for judgement the word be  affirmative of the plaintiff as neighbor anteceden and especial because its  thereby insinuate that the plaintiff be unfit for a justice which be a office  of trust credit and profit I Cr Cawdry against Higley the court conceive the  opinion of the court to be against the book car Sanderson against Rud that a  be a ignorant man and not fit for the place videlicet steward of court have  these word be speak of a lawyer or physician they have be actionable per  curian but not so here h car rot Hammon against Kingsby he be a debauch man  and not fit to be a justice of peace which have be actionable have the word be  in the present tense but the court by Twisden deliver no opinion as to that  and though the statute require discretion yet to call one indiscreet justice  be not actionable Allen for the defendant here be no crime charge or apply to  the condition of the person Cr as the word relate to the plaintiff the court  be of opinion with he but not so now upon consideration of the word themselves  the case of holly and Bristol be strong then this that he be a rascally  villain c and though justice have wage its no profitable office to he and this  be no crime in he but he be such as God have make he Twisden ad idem mallet  contra foster conceive the word not actionable but will have the defendant  bind to good behaviour which the court agree and order it accord judgement for  the defendant Keble er p
bill against neal ante slander the word relate ad neighbor anteceden and here  by say you will be a justice of peace like the plaintiff a fool a ass and a  coxcomb and a buffleheaded justice the word be actionable r the justice lose  his wage thereby or be in peril thereof the case of Brisco Cr be not like this  which reflect on he in his very capacity to be a justice post Adjornatur
bill against neal Siderf pl slander Cr pl more pl Cr pl of one that he will be  like Mr major bill who be a fool and a ass a coxcomb and a buffleheaded  justice of peace Windham doubt whether any action lie h James Hollis against  Bristol be no scandal to his profession wile for the plaintiff No greatar  scandal can be to a justice then to call he fool Adjornatur
bill against parishioner by executrix of one of the churchwarden of W to be  reimburse money lie out by the testator as churchwarden for rebuilding the  steeple of the church object that this matter be proper for the ecclesiastical  court only but by Harcourt c the plaintiff be proper for relief here and there  be many precedent of the like nature one in the time of Cowper c against the  parishioner of saint clement for the organ in the church and many more before  and decree that the parishioner shall reimburse plaintiff the money lie out by  her testator with cost and the same to be raise by a ParishRate east Ann  Nicholson and master all parishioner of Woodford in Com Essex vin Abr pl
bill against the city of London by plaintiff in behalf of himself and the rest  of the proprietor of orphan stock to have a account of the produce of the  orphanage stock and to have the surplus of that fund for some year pass apply  to make good the deficiency of former year for that by stat W m cap sect the  produce of that and be apply for the payment of the annual sum of pound per  cent to the proprietor or so much thereof only as the money by this Act  appoint to be raise and pay shall yearly amount unto to satisfy and pay  towards the say interest to the say orphan equal in proportion c and that  there be no provision by the say Act for make good the deficiency of any  former year by the surplus of any subsequent year c king c assist with Raymond  Ch I and Jekyll master of the roll hold that the intent and scope of this Act  be to secure pound per cent to the city orphan for ever for the respective sum  due to they from the city and the several fund thereby raise be appropriate  for that purpose and the city be make trustee for they and be to have no  benefit by those fund until the pound per cent be pay to the orphan and though  sect of the Act say that the fund shall be yearly apply only to the payment of  the annual interest of pound per cent yet the word only in that place shall  not control and overthrow the general tenor and scope of the whole Act and  that clause seem chief calculate for the benefit of the orphan to prevent any  misapplication or to apply any part of the annual fund to make good former  deficiency before the pound per cent for the current year be full pay and  satisfy and not give the benefit and advantage of any yearly surplus to the  city till all former deficiency be make good to the orphan decree that the  city account for the several year surpluse receive by they and pay over the  same to the orphan pro rata until the former deficiency be make good to they c  hill Geo land and London city vin Abr pl Moseley pl
bill and Bulstrode fee wile justice say that in c b in web and blanchers case  a indebitatus lie by attorney as well for his fee as for money expend but by  hale chief justice though the law create such a promise as in real contract as  for rend c yet not in personal as this for fee S say adjornatur
bill be bring against three of the trustee of the sunfire office to make good  a loss by fire c plaintiff have a policy upon which he usual pay S per quarter  and which by the proposal be to be pay upon the quarterday or within day after  and the method of collect the money be by the agent of the office call at the  person house which they do sometime within the day and sometime a few day  after plaintiff policy expire at Michaelmas and the day be out and October the  agent of the office do not call for the S and on the that of November follow  plaintiff house be burn a the agent of the office examine for plaintiff swear  that if the fire have not happen he shall have call on plaintiff for his  quarter age the that or that of same November Lord Chan king in law this  policy be a agreement to insure quarterly as long as the party please this  insurance be on book and the party to pay quarterly the continuance or not  depend on the Act of the party insure videlicet on his pay S per quarter and  upon his pay at the quarter or within day after the insurer covenant to pay c  the loss and in a declaration at law the payment within the day must be aver  if the office have dispense with the time and take the premium after this  court will have hold they to it but here it be neither pay nor tender the  officer be appoint a collector for the benefit and ease of the person pay c  and to prevent any misunderstand there be a memorandum on the very receipt  that the payment after the day be not to dispense with the term and the agent  have no authority after the day to take the money the premium be the  consideration and be to precede and if the day be not the time what shall be  the time within which it shall be necessary to pay bill dismiss mich Geo  fisher and Brocas vin Abr pl
bill be bring to establish a modus which be lie thus for payment of such a sum  of money but if in the hand of any other person to pay tithe in kind or the  money at the election of the parson and Lord Chan king say he will never  establish a modus against a parson without a trial at law if he desire it vide  the case of Brinklow and Edmonds above but this modus be clear ill for a modus  can be desultory Nov Webber and tailor select case in Chan
bill be dismiss by the master of the roll and this decree be affirm by ld king  on appeal hill Grubarr and Gairand equity case abridge if a mortgagee by will  remit part of the mortgage money provide the rest be pay within three year  after his death and the devisee fail to pay the money he shall lose the  benefit of the devise glover v portington Chan can
bill be dismiss with cost which be tax a bill of revivor be bring single for  these cost but on demurrer it be hold that the bill will not lie per king c  hill thorn and Pitt Sel Cas in Chan in argue the demurrer it be insist that  though the constant rule be that where a bill be dismiss with cost the party  entitle to they can revive for that that must be take to be where they be not  tax and liquidate to a sum certain for then it become a duty and though the  bill be dismiss it be not so much out of the court but the party in  consequence of such dismissal be liable to the process of the court by Subpna  attachment c but per Lord Chan it be a rule that unless in account where both  party be actor they can revive say he know no instance of revivor in such a  case as this that it be very odd but the rule of the court must be observe  ibidem for more of revivor vide b p also p can equity case abridge er p l bill  TO examine witness in continuous rei memory Eq can Abr vide also title  evidence p
bill be for a account and to impeach a award between plaintiff and defendant r  touch a partnership in buy and sell diamond in France in and the bill be  against the arbitrator as well as the party defendant b the party as to the  account c plead the award c and the arbitrator as to a discovery of several  particular pray by the bill and as to any relief against they plead the  submission and that by consent it be make a order of this court c Lord Chan  allow b s plea to the account c but overrule the arbitrator plea as cover too  much I e several particular which may tend to show a partiality c in their  proceed note in debate of the case it be argue that a award make upon a  submission pursuant to the statute W can not be set aside but for partiality  or corruption in the arbitrator complain of within two term after the award  make a and in the present case though the Act of parliament be not particular  rely upon yet it appear that the submission be make a order of this court and  that be say to be sufficient to bring it within the statute but the bill be  file within a few day after so that no advantage can be take of not complain  accord to the Act within two term c and it be urge that though the two term do  elapse before any complaint yet that do not oust this court of jurisdiction  and power to set aside the award at any time for misbehaviour c and a case of  ware and walker b be cite by Mr attorneygeneral of a award so set aside by  Lord Macclesfield which have be make under a submission make a rule of court  but Lord Chan seem to doubt as think the statute give two term c conclude all  court and all manner of equity c Godfrey and Boucher Geo vin Abr pl
bill bring by the rector of S for tithe of beast feed upon a common defendant  by answer insist that the common extend into several parish and that the  custom be that every farmer shall pay tithe to the rector where he live and  that he live in another parish and he pay the tithe to that rector but there  be proof that the cattle be drive upon that part of the common that tie in S  there be a decree for the rector of S but reverse because the custom be good  there be equity case abridge er p no enclosure Jan Micleburgh and crisp vin  Abr pl SC bro p c
bill bring to set aside a purchase and to have a discovery of the site and  profit of the estate defendant by answer insist that he be a purchaser and  that he be not oblige to make a discovery to which exception be take for not  answer and that exception allow per king c in support of the exception be cite  the case of Stephens and Stephens before Lord Macclesfield which be a bill be  bring for a discovery of the rend and profit of a estate which plaintiff claim  by will from a common ancestor defendant say he be entitle to the estate and  therefore till the right be determine he be not oblige to give a account of  the rend and profit Lord Macclesfield say this may have be good by way of plea  but defendant have answer must answer the charge of the bill so late in the  case of Edward and freeman bill bring for a account the defendant controvert  the right and say he be not oblige to give a account before that be settle and  Lord chancellor videlicet king be of opinion that defendant have answer the  charge of the bill must be answer Soresolved here mich Geo Richardson and  Mitchel Sel case in Chan ms Rep SC accord
bill by a conusee of a statute of the mortgagor to redeem after a decree of  before closure c the defendant plead a decree of foreclosure and that the  statute be acknowledge after the mortgagee bill file that the mortgagee have  no notice and make proper party at the fill of the bill and that the present  plaintiff take the security pendent light per Harcourt c this be a recent  foreclosure let the plaintiff redeem upon payment of what be due with cost  July Ann crisp and heath vin Abr pl
bill by a executor against a legatee to refund a legacy voluntary pay he by  the executor the asset fall short to satisfy the testator debt decree that the  defendant shall refund to the plaintiff and that a executor may bring a bill  against a legatee to refund a legacy voluntary pay as well as a creditor for  the executor pay a debt of the testator out of his own pocket stand in the  place of the creditor and have the same equity against the legatee to compel  he to refund contrary to the opinion in vent Noell and Robinson and vent  Hodges and Waddington per sir Joseph Jekyll master of the roll east Geo Davis  and Davis vin Abr pl dick
bill by creditor of testator and one of the residuary legatee against a debtor  to the testator estate the executor and the other residuary legatee to compel  the debtor to pay his debt to satisfy their demand and per Lord Chan the bill  be total improper and inconsistent with the principle of law and the rule of  this court contra by a executor the Representative of the testator the whole  management of the estate belong to the executor and the right of it be vest in  he and not to be take out of he by creditor or legatee if he release and be  solvent it be a devastavit and he be answerable himself for the sum release to  the creditor and legatee if collusion and insolvency it may be proper to come  here for satisfaction against the debtor but it must be always upon some  special case which be not pretend either by the bill or at the bar and for the  many inconvenience that will attend this method of proceed except a case  particular circumstance the bill must be dismiss but without cost because it  may have be demurrer to mich Geo Bickley all and Donington ms Rep vide the  case of franklin and fern Eq can Abr p can
bill by heir at law against a executrix to have a account of the personal  estate of his ancestor c and to have it first apply in exoneration of the real  estate devise to trustee to be sell for payment of debt W by will devise to  trustee ut above and give his wife several specific legacy and further devise  to her all the residue of his personal estate and also give her the sum of  pound out of the money to be raise by sale of the trust estate and make her  executrix Harcourt c say this be a much strong case than that of Christ  hospital and equity case abridge Garraway for there be no devise out of the  personal estate but here be that and also a devise of the personal estate it  show that he do not think this sufficient for her but give her a further sum  of pound which be the strong presumption imaginable of the intent that the  wife shall have the residue of the personal estate and as to the account  thereof the bill be dismiss Ann wase and Whitfield vin Abr pl
bill by plaintiff as only child of a freeman for her share of her father be  personal estate plaintiff at several time have receive several sum of her  father in his lifetime and he have transfer pound bank stock in trust foe  himself in order to dispose of it by his will to defendant Tracy I who sit for  Lord Chan order a account to be take of what money plaintiff have receive from  her father in his lifetime and on what account and reserve the consideration  whether such money shall be take in part of her customary share or whether she  shall have a moiety of her father be estate beside what he have give her in  his lifetime there be no other child curian advisare vult Trin Geo Stanley and  Norcliff vin Abr pl
bill by plaintiff for a injunction against defendant old son of a Copy holder  to make good the defect of a surrender of a copyhold in favour of a will  whereby the father give this copyhold and all other his estate for the  maintenance of the plaintiff his young child till and then to be divide among  the plaintiff and defendant to have a share Lord Chan say the rule be when the  old son be total disinherit not to interpose and this be very near to a total  disinherison the old not be to have any thing till the young be of age  injunction deny mich Vac hicken all and hicken vin Abr pl
bill by the devisee of the land against the heir at law to establish testator  will upon the hear the issue Devisavit well non be direct to be try at law and  upon the trial there be a verdict for the will then defendant move for a new  trial without any certificate from the judge or affidavit relate to the trial  but insist it be a doubtful case and evidence both way and that by the rule of  the court the inheritance of a heir at law shall not be final bind and  conclude by one trial Lord Chan king say he know no such rule and see no  reason for it and deny the equity case abridge er p motion but give the  defendant leave to apply to the judge and if he be not satisfy with the  verdict they may move it again upon such certificate mich Geo durant and  durant vin Abr pl
bill by the heir and residuary legatee of a against his widow and executrix to  have a account of his estate it be prove that a be very old and infirm for  seven year before his death do not receive money himself though he sign  receipt and execute lease c but the money be usual pay to defendant Cowper c  decree defendant to account for what money she receive seven year before her  husband be death but that the master shall be easy in take the account and  allow for housekeeping c without voucher mich Geo buckle and Milman vin Abr pl
bill by the heir and residuary legatee of a against his wife and executrix to  have a account of testator estate it be prove that the testator be very old  and infirm for seven year before his death do not receive money himself though  he sign receipt and execute lease c but the money be usual pay to his wife  Cowper c decree the wife to account for what money she receive for seven  equity case abridge er p year before her husband be death but that the master  shall be easy in take the account and allow for housekeeping c without voucher  mich Geo buckle and Milman vin Abr pl
bill by the heir at law against the executor to have a account of the personal  estate of the testator and that it may be apply in exoneration of the real  estate devise to trustee to be sell for payment of debt and legacy the case be  this W by will devise several land to trustee to be sell for payment of his  debt and legacy and devise all the residue of his personal estate to his wife  and give her also pound out of the money to be raise by sale of the trust  estate and make her executrix Harcourt c say here be not only a devise over of  the residue of his personal estate to his executrix but he give her further  the sum of pound out of the real estate so that he do not think the residue of  the personal estate sufficient for her but give her pound out of his real  estate which be the strong presumption imaginable of the intent of the  testator that his wife shall have the residue of his personal estate and this  make it differ from the cage of Garroway and Christ hospital for there be no  devise unto his executor out of his real estate bill dismiss quoad a account  of his personal estate mich Ann Waise and Whitfield vin Abr pl this case be  misplace in point of time and also the follow case until you come to u
bill by the heir of the mortgagor to redeem a mortgage of copyhold land upon  payment of principal and interest the defendant insist to have a judgement  which he have assign to he first satisfy before plaintiff shall redeem cur  copyhold land be not liable to a execution upon a judgement ergo the judgement  shall not be tack to the mortgage in this case but the plaintiff shall redeem  upon payment of principal c without satisfy the judgement by Lord c Harcourt  east Ann heir of cannon and pack vin Abr pl
bill for a discovery of tithe of Furze and payment thereof defendant by answer  insist that Furze spend upon the premise be not titheable and also that  Underwood and Furze general be not titheable in that parish c plaintiff admit  that no tithe be due for Underwood or Furze spend upon the premise but insist  upon tithe of Furze make into faggot and sell by the defendant cite more that  Underwood or Furze spend for fire or fence of the premise be not titheable but  Underwood or Furze sell be titheable in the proof of the Cause there be some  evidence of d per annum pay call smoke money in lieu of tithe or of Furze but  that not be insist on by the answer but a general non decimando for Underwood  and Furze Lord Chan Harcourt decree defendant to account for tithe of fur e  make into faggot and sell but not for Furze burn or use upon the premise and  defendant to pay cost mich a Roffe and Harding vin Abr VI
bill for a modus c the defendant plead a verdict and judgement obtain by he in  a action of debt upon the statute Edward against the defendant Roger for not  set forth tithe c and the plea be allow the plaintiff bill be for payment of a  modus of S d per annum in lieu of tithe c the defendant as to so much of the  bill as charge the payment of a modus or any yearly sum of money for and in  lieu of tithe for any of the land in the bill mention except out of h meadow  or that seek relief here against the defendant for or concern the same or  against the verdict obtain by the defendant against the pretend modus or which  seek relief touch any record exemplification or abstract concern the premise  for plea say that the defendant now be and for twenty year last pass have be  rector of the parish and church of Hunsdon and duly institute and induct c and  that in Michaelmas term year car a action of debt be bring by he as rector c  against Thomas Roger concern the payment of tithe in kind upon the statute e  for the forfeiture give by that statute report tempt finch for not set out his  tithe which say Roger be then tenant of parcel of the land whereof the bill  suggest the modus to be pay and the Cause come on to a trial the then Lord  Willoughby who be owner of the say land endeavour to support the pretend modus  now insist on by the plaintiff and make all the defence he can in person both  on the behalf of himself and tenant and especial of his tenant Roger against  who the say action be bring but yet a verdict pass at the assize against the  pretend modus on which verdict judgement be duly enter which verdict and  judgement the defendant plead in bar of the plaintiff demand by this bill and  the court allow the plea to be good
bill for a specific performance of a promise by defendant to procure plaintiff  to be make deputy to defendant son as clerk of the house of peer or otherwise  to provide for plaintiff in consideration of plaintiff insist upon and solicit  in procure a reversionary grant of that place for defendant son which  defendant now enjoy defendant plead the statute of fraud and that the promise  be not in write nor to be perform within one year and also the statute of  limitation that the promise be make above six year before the bill file plea  allow in both respect Trin in scacc Reynolds and Cowper vin Abr pl the court  hold that a parole promise to be perform upon a contingency which may or may  not happen within a year after the make be void within the statute of fraud  and so if make above six year before the bill or action bring be bar by the  statute of limitation though the contingency or time of performance happen  within the six year ibidem but see the contrary hold in Bac Abr
bill for discovery of the consideration of a promissory note for pound suggest  that it be give ex ugly causan to smother and make up a felony c defendant by  his answer say that he lose such a sum and very believe that it come to  plaintiff hand and that be the real consideration of give the note Cowper c  dismiss the bill with cost for what the defendant have swear not be disprove  be a sufficient consideration to support the note mich Geo Guiborn and  Fiellows vin Abr
bill for the discovery of the consideration of a promissory note for pound  suggest that it be give ex ugly causan to smother and make up a felony c  demurrer to that part of the bill which seek a discovery if the note be not  give to make up a felony which be of a criminal nature c and the demurrer  allow mich Geo in canc Guiborn and fellow et all vin Abr pl
bill for the execution of article for the sale of land against the executor  and devisees of land for life and the infant heir of the vendor decree that  the article be carry into execution and the plaintiff such upon pay the  purchase money to the executor to be let into possession at ladyday next and  the executor and devisees to make a conveyance in fee to plaintiff at his cost  and plaintiff to hold the premise against the infant heir who when of full age  be to convey to plaintiff and his heir unless within six month after he come  of age he show Cause to the contrary king c hill Geo such and Lister all vin  Abr pl
bill in the duchy for land the defendant demurrer because the plaintiff do not  express aver the land to be within the duchy which be a circumscribe  jurisdiction and the demurrer be hold good by Lord Lechmere chancellor of the  duchy equity case abridge er p court king c I and equity case abridge page and  reeves baron east Geo Lord coningsby case Mod
bill lessee OF stroud against holt chancellor OF well lease Siderf pl in  evidence to a jury Mr attorney propose as doubt that a lease by the chancellor  predecessor be not within h he be infra those inferior in rank ordines who to  use as a servant church and no prebend and Buston against Dennis James a  precento of saint Paul although a prebend be unresolved whether capable or not  to make such a lease and a prebend have be but late settle as able also this  chancellor have a prebend distinct and this impropriation be not part of his  corporation hide hereby all the cathedral possession will be shake and by  Windham this be but a name of dignity annex to the prebendary and they be  prebend as subdean c Twisden the better opinion of the precentor be that the  lease be good but I do not remember it be adjudge so of a treasurer these be  but office annex to such prebendary and Keeling never doubt it and Br lease do  give the reason why prebend be within the statute in regard he be not exempt  but only parson and vicar Jones for the defendant lease by prebend not  warrantable by statute be void against successor if unconfirmed which be a  argument that he be not seize in fee and where he be seize jure prebend it be  much doubt but now settle but per curian this be a impropriation can be annex  as a appendant to the office of chancellor but only in right of his prebendary  and therefore his lease be good against the successor without confirmation of  the dean and chapter and they will not suffer a special verdict nor question  of it but by turner for the defendant the chanter of Paul in the case of  morris in the exchequer now late Keble be hold unable to make lease be only  singingman no dignity as this be also after forty year possession the court  will intend it ancient demise and demisable
bill lie to compel a specific performance of a award where the party submit  have receive the money in consideration whereof he be to convey the estate sue  for decree per sir Joseph Jekyll master of the roll Trin hall and hardis will  Rep vide title agreement c SC Eq can Abr p can and the note there
bill lie to perpetuate testimony c before trial on affidavit annex that the  plaintiff witness be infirm and unable to travel hill Philips and Carew will  Rep
bill OF lade the follow copy of a bill of lade date that June be take from the  admiralty court Act book of that date fol Mr r h page
bill plaintiff against knight defendant a action upon the case for word in a  action upon the case for word which as appear by the declaration be lie to be  these speak in this manner by the defendant to some other of the plaintiff S  that he come to such a house where one lie sick in his bed and the plaintiff  get upon the bed and with his knee do break his bloodbulk and that thereby he  have kill he for these word a action be bring and upon not guilty plead a  verdict be give for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that the  word be not actionable the declaration not good have not therein aver especial  that the party be dead the whole court agree in this that the declaration be  good and that if it do not appear in the declaration that he be live it shall  be intend that he be dead coke justice if one say of another that he have  murder such a one who be live these word be actionable Fleming chief justice  deny this to be so but if he have say that he have poison he otherwise it be  in this principal case the whole court agree clear the word to be scandalous  and well actionable the declaration to be good without any averment that the  party be dead and so by the rule of the court judgement be give and so enter  for the plaintiff
bill to be quiet in the possession of a ancient ferry use with a rope over the  river ware be bring against twenty defendant who have cut the rope to avoid  the multiplicity of action per Parker c plaintiff may have trespass for cut  the rope a ferry be in nature of a highway and a bill do not lie to be quiet  in possession of a highway a bill lie to be quiet in the possession of common  vide next case but that be of a different nature this be a navigable river and  the rope to the ferry be a obstruction to the navigation if plaintiff have any  such equity case abridge right there be a proper remedy for he at law bill  dismiss with cost east Ann Hilton and Lord Scarborough all vin Abr pl a bill  be bring to be quiet in the possession of a right of common and to prevent  distress and though the plaintiff produce affidavit of above fifty year quiet  possession and evidence of their right of commonage in the time of Q Elizabeth  yet the court refuse to interpose till one or more verdict at law and dissolve  plaintiff injunction obtain for want of a answer rule on motion per king c  hill g anon pale yellow Eq Rep
bill to be relieve against a forfeiture for nonpayment of rend by a tenant at  a rackrent after a recovery in ejectment decree that upon payment of the rend  and cost at law and in equity defendant make a new lease for the remainder of  the term to plaintiff but a covenant to be insert for the tenant to repair  during the term though no such covenant be in the former lease king c mich Geo  tailor and knight vin Abr pl his lordship say he do not like give relief in  these case after a judgement at law but that the precedent be too strong for  he ibidem
bill to be relieve against a forfeiture for nonpayment of rend by a tenant at  a rackrent after a recovery in ejectment king c decree that upon payment of  the rend and cost at law and in equity the defendant shall make a new lease  for the remainder of the term to the plaintiff but order a covenant to be  insert for the tenant to repair during the term though no such covenant be in  the former lease mich Geo tailor and tonight vin Abr pl his lordship say he do  not like give relief here in these case after a judgement at law but say the  precedent be too strong for he ibidem in S c a court of equity have a  concurrent jurisdiction with the admiralty and ecclesiastical court per hale b  east Geo cite it as a say of sir John Trevor late master of the roll pale  yellow Eq Rep
bill to be relieve against a will obtain by fraud and imposition upon this  case the plaintiff son have make a will in Jan and thereby devise all his real  and personal estate to plaintiff his father but fall ill soon after at a great  distance from his father of a consumption of which he die defendant persuade  he to make a new will some short time before his death whereby he devise all  his real and personal estate to defendant be his kinsman upon trust to pay his  debt and legacy but say nothing of the residuum but there be the general  clause of revoke all former will c there be several witness to prove a  imposition and contrivance and false suggestion to induce the testator to make  this new will sufficient to satisfy the court that it be unfair obtain but the  will be regular sign seal and publish accord to the statute car and so a good  will at law Lord Chan Parker after have take time to consider of it decree as  Mr viner say he hear defendant to account for the personal estate have just  allowance c and to convey the real estate to plaintiff subject to the payment  of the testator debt as a trustee for the plaintiff mich Geo Bransby and  Kerridge et all in cane vin Abr pl
bill to bring in one that live out of the jurisdiction of London to come in  and give security for the orphan portion accord to the custom of the city ld  king decree plaintiff to try the custom mayor and alderman of London and  slaughter ibidem
bill to compel the defendant and his wife to join in a fine to the plaintiff  pursuant to his covenant in a conveyance the defendant and his wife and h  their son and heir set forth in their answer that defendant h be tenant for  life remainder to his wife for life remainder to the heir of the husband beget  on the body of the wife remainder to the husband be heir and insist that  nothing pass by the conveyance but a estate for life of the husband and equity  case abridge that the wife do not seal the deed decree that the husband the  defendant shall procure his wife to join with he in a fine to the plaintiff  accord to his covenant since he have take upon he to do it and the plaintiff  bath pay the full value of the estate by Cowper c mich Geo Barrington and horn  all vin Abr pl the husband and wife be party to the deed but the husband only  seal it though the covenant be that the husband and wife shall levy a fine and  a fine sur Conusans de law c be levy by the husband alone ibidem
bill to have a satisfaction of a judgement against a purchaser of the equity  of redemption of the land or to redeem encumbrance c the defendant insist on  the stat pound W m cap that no judgement shall affect a purchaser or mortgagee  unless docket this judgement be not docket till and the purchase be make in  insist that the defendant the purchaser have notice of this judgement and a  allowance for it in the purchase and that raise a equity for the plaintiff  against he and per Lord Chan Macclesfleld it be plain the defendant have  notice of the judgement and do not pay the value of the estate and that be a  strong presumption of a agreement to pay off the judgement and since the  equity case abridge plaintiff can proceed at law against the defendant upon  the judgement for want of docketting in due time he ought to be relieve in a  court of equity decree that the defendant pay to the plaintiff the money good  fide due upon the judgement Geo Thomas and Pledwell vin Abr pl
bill to have a satisfaction of a judgement against a purchaser of the equity  of redemption of the land or to redeem encumbrance c the defendant insist on  the stat W m cap that no judgement shall affect a purchaser or mortgage unless  docket this judgement be not docket till and the purchase be make in  Macclesfield c it be plain defendant have notice of the judgement and do not  pay the value of the estate and that be a strong presumption of a agreement to  pay off the judgement and since plaintiff can proceed at law against defendant  upon the judgement for want of docketing in due time he ought to be relieve  here decree that defendant pay plaintiff the money good fide due upon the  judgement mich Geo Thomas and Pledwell vin ab pl
bill to have a specific performance of a agreement of a purchase of land  against the heir and executor of a to who land be devise for payment of debt  cross bill by the heir against the executor to account for the personal estate  of the testator to come in aid of the real estate devise to be sell for  payment of debt the testator devise particular land to his executor to be sell  for payment of all his proper debt and make a and b executor decree that the  executor account for the personal estate of the testator for that be liable to  payment of debt in aid of the real estate and since the personal estate be not  sufficient to pay off the debt and mortgage the land must be sell to pay the  residue of the debt and the surplus of the money raise by the sale after the  debt pay to go to the heir per Harcourt c mich Ann gale and Crofts et all vin  Abr pl SC dick see lady gainsborough case hungerfords case cook and more all  in dom proc Christ hospital and Garroway hale and hale both in canc tempt  Cowper c cite for the heir at law to prove that where there be no negative  word in the will a express devise of all the personal estate to the executor  do not exempt the per estate from payment of the testator debt though there be  a devise of land for payment of debt ibidem equity case abridge er p
bill to have a specific performance of a agreement upon this case a during his  minority by himself and guardian enter into article with defendant to let he a  farm at a certain rend c defendant enter upon the farm and continue the  possession and pay the rend after a come of full age after that a convey the  inheritance to the plaintiff and then defendant quit the farm insist that he  be only a tenant at will and refuse to accept a lease or execute a counterpart  because a be a infant at the time of make the agreement be not bind by it and  therefore defendant ought not to be bind by it and Harcourt c decree that the  plaintiff h u d execute a lease to the defendant and the defendant execute a  counterpart of such lease to the plaintiff in pursuance of the article and  defendant to pay cost Trin Ann Clayton and ashdown vin Abr pl
bill to redeem after a decree of foreclosure sign and enrol in suggest fraud  and surprise in obtain the decree and a parole declaration before and after  the decree that the mortgagee be Willing to take his principal interest and  cost and quit the estate defendant plead the decree and deny the fraud c the  deposition of several witness be read to prove such a parole declaration by  the mortgagee and that plaintiff and defendant in the former Cause have the  same clerk in court c bill dismiss with cost by Harcourt c east Ann Whishall  and short decree affirm in dom proc vin Abr pl bro p c S c Lord Chan say  plaintiff come too late that he know no instance where a man be let in to  redeem by a new bill after a decree of foreclosure sign and enrol upon any  parole agreement or declaration or by reason of overvalue of the estate such a  thing will be of dangerous consequence and shake abundance of title perhaps  there may be a instance of relief upon a bill to redeem after a decree of  foreclosure but then the bill be bring in a very short time after the decree  and there must be some extraordinary circumstance in the case but say equity  case abridge er p he do not remember any such case of relief ibidem in SC a  court of equity be cautious to make a decree without a precedent lie down as a  rule in a ms case which I have see
bill to set aside a award and to be relieve against a action law on the bind  of submission the defendant plead as to so much of the bill as seek to set  aside the award and stay the defendant equity case abridge proceed at law and  he set forth the submission and award to be fair make c but the plea be  overrule because it cover too much for the plaintiff in all event be entitle  to relief against the penalty of the bind though the merit be with the  defendant potter and Davy mich vin Abr pl in note note Mr viner make a quaere  if the money have be equal to or exceed the penalty of the bind whether then  the plaintiff be not entitle to any relief ibidem
bill to set aside a award make pursuant to a rule of court in b r for  misbehaviour in the arbitrator upon this case the plaintiff and defendant  enter into a arbitration bind and submit to make it a rule of court and a  award be make pursuant to the submission by rule of court but the plaintiff  not like the award apply to the court of b r to set it aside and make several  objection to it and the court be divide in opinion a rule be make to hear  counsel why the award shall not be set aside and afterward the rule be  discharge but the court be equity case abridge er p divide in opinion the  plaintiff can not obtain a rule for a attachment for nonperformance of the  award and therefore bring a action upon the arbitration bind and get judgement  and then ware the defendant at law bring his bill to be relieve against the  award the question be whether the plaintiff at law not have pursue the method  prescribe by stat W cap by attachment but have bring a action upon the  arbitration bind at commonlaw and have not plead the statute to the  jurisdiction of this court the court upon these circumstance may not proceed  to examine the award c the defendant counsel insist that the award be make by  rule of court pursuant to the say statute and set out to be so make by  defendant answer and the defendant ought to have the benefit of the statute as  well as if he have plead it and equity case abridge the party to the award  have no remedy but by application to the court where the rule be make that  this statute be plead to the jurisdiction of this court tempore Cowper c and  the plea be allow order that the master shall make a state of the case for the  resolution of the court easter Geo in canc ware and periam all vin Abr pl
bill to set aside lease make pursuant to a power dismiss because a matter pure  determinable at law I e whether the power be well execute or not and per  Jekyll master of the roll if a bill be bring for a matter proper determinable  at law defendant ought to demurrer and not suffer the Cause to go on to a hear  and if the bill be dismiss upon hear defendant shall not have cost and where  the Title be pure matter of law though the legal estate be vest in trustee the  beneficiary and trust ought first to apply to the trustee to make use of their  name at law before he bring a bill in equity for a bill in such a case be only  necessary where the trustee refuse their name to be make use of in a action to  determine the right east Geo tichburn and leigh vin Abr pl bill for  treasuretrove dismiss without cost because trover lie bunb Rep in scacc bill  for beaconage dismiss be proper at law ibidem bill for a specific performance  of suit to a manor court dismiss ibidem bill for a feefarm rend or lawday  silver of S d Payable at plaintiff leet or at the tourn of the hundred of S  dismiss ibidem
bill v body injunction to stay the defendant suit at law because he begin in  chancery the defendant exhibit his bill into the chancery for certain land and  afterward sue the plaintiff in the common plea for the same land before the  matter be determine in the chancery therefore a injunction be award against  the say body to stay his proceed in the common plea Robert bill and Thomas  Gifford plaintiffs John body defendant year Elizabeth fol SC dick
bill v pate attachment for breach of a order a attachment be award against the  defendant choice case in chancery for proceed in the court of the manor of  Bersted contrary to the order of this court Billing plaintiff pate and other  defendant year Eliz
bill v Robinson information and verdict for defendant in a action against the  informer he shall be permit to give in evidence that there be a probable cause  for make the seizure a information be exhibit upon a seizure and upon the  trial there be a verdict for the defendant therefore the defendant bring a  action against the informer for this seizure without aliquan commendable  causan upon the trial of this cause before Bunbury baron price at Winchester  he will not permit the defendant to go into the evidence give upon the trial  of the information to prove the probabiles causan because he say it will be  arraign that verdict but upon a motion for a new trial the Lord chief baron  bury and baron page absent Montague be clear of opinion that that evidence  shall have be admit and make no difference which be much insist on where the  action be try before the information and where after and it will not be  arraign the verdict on the information for that there be a wide difference  between a strict legal cause and a probable cause and a new trial be grant
billers knight and another against bowl hilary geo rule to show cause why  inquisition take on writ of inquiry of damage make absolute no evidence of  plaintiff demand have be give to the sheriff and jury plaintiff urge that the  demand be by promissory note endorse set forth in the declaration which be  admit by not plead and the damage find be only the amount of principal and  interest due on such note but the court hold that the note endorse ought to  have be produce and the note and endorsement prove agar for defendant urlin  for plaintiff
billinghurst versus spearman pasch W salk side if a executor have a term of  less yearly value than the rend in a action bring in the debet and to hold off  be may plead the special matter videlicet that he have no asset and that the  land be of less value than the rend and demand judgement if he ought not to be  chant in the to hold off so much by holt I and that hale be of the same  opinion and it be but reasonable because a executor can not wave for the term  only for be must renounce the executorship in toto or not at all
billings case charge keb Billing be commit to the Marshalsea for diverse  misdemeanour and he be in prison for the say offence be charge with action and  judgement obtain against they and the court be move he may be discharge of  those action and resolve by the court when a man be in prison for criminal  matter he be not Chargeable with a civil action without leave of the court but  if he happen to be Raymond sir t er p charge become non to withhold send  factum valet but they ought to have move the court first but now once charge  he can be discharge
Billingsley and tap vide ante the defendant have since the last motion demand  oyer of the capias and plead that he be arrest upon it four day before the sue  out of the original but have not verify this plea by affidavit upon which Mr  fazakerly move that the plea may be set aside and that with cost as be a  Barnardiston king b against the opinion of the court the chief justice say  that he think that the defendant be well entitle to oyer of the capias but  that he can not have oyer of the mean process without have oyer of the  original one and that he have not demand accord the plea be set aside with  cost
Billingsley versus trap pasch Geo two b r upon a special capias the defendant  crave oyer of the original upon a special capias the defendant crave oyer of  the original which be test in the vacation whereas the special capias bear  testae the term precede the original be the first process that ought to issue  out and be what warrant the proceed upon the capias so that it be repugnant  that the capias shall hear testae precedent to the original and for this  reason Mr S counsel move that the plaintiff may give oyer of such a original  as can warrant the proceed upon the capias and that the defendant may have  four day time to plead Mr f counsel answer that the capias be only to bring  the party into court and that after appearance it be of no further use but be  out of the question that from the necessity of the thing the capias must in  this case be test before the W Kelynge er p original a original though it be  take out in the vacation yet hear testae from that time only but it be  otherwise in a capias which only can issue out in termtime and therefore from  the necessity of the thing must bear testae when it be take out in the  vacation as if it have W Kelynge issue the term precede and cite the case of  Andrews and Dingley Trin Geo b b which be this the Cause of action arise in  vacation the plaintiff take out a special capias which be test the precede  term and upon motion to quash this Writ the court adjudge the Writ to be well  enough otherwise the plaintiff must have stay till the term follow which will  be inconvenient for the defendant may in the interim move off the court refuse  to do any thing in the present case and say if the plaintiff be irregular the  defendant may take what advantage of it he think proper vide post case
Bilson against hill Writ of error in assumpsit bring on a promissory note by  the endorsee against the endorse object that no default of payment by the  drawer upon application to he be lie in the declaration there be a express  promise of payment to the endorsee lie in the declaration the other be matter  of evidence only judgement affirm I apprehend the safe way be to aver that  payment be require of the drawer who refuse and the precedent be so shearman v  wright Lil
Bilson V sander de term sanct mich Oct in the exchequer legacy to bear  interest from a year after the death of the testator a legacy be leave to a  infant the testator have a great deal of money in Bankstock the executor be  residuary legatee the bill be bring for the legacy and question be whether it  shall b ear interest and from what time chief baron Pengelly and hale baron it  be a certain rule that where the fund be certain as when charge on land it  shall bear interest because it plain appear the rend be receive so the fund on  which it be charge produce a profit here it be equal certain and therefore  shall bear interest salk small v do you and shall be from the testator death  but this be oppose by carter and come baron that it shall only bear interest  from a year after the testator death for as legacy be to be pay after debt the  executor have that tie to inquire till which be not Payable so not to bear  interest to which it be agree select case tempt king er p select case tempt  king a difference be offer to be make that as this be a legacy to a infant it  can not be safe pay and therefore shall not bear interest to which it be  answer by the chief baron that it may be safe pay into the hand of a infant  have proper evidence of the payment as in Wentworth exec and per carter may be  pay into the hand of the guardian have evidence but if take security from the  guardian which shall prove defective there as do not rely on the security the  law give must depend on that take at his peril
Bilson v sander Oct from what time a legacy shall carry interest bill by  infant for legacy against the executor and also for interest from the death of  the testator the defendant by his answer insist that he be always ready to pay  the legacy but do not know who to pay they to safe that he ought not to pay  interest because though he have eleven hundred pound bank stock from the  testator death still remain stock that it be at the time of the testator death  one hundred and fifty pound per cent and at present be only one hundred and  thirty pound per cent and with the other asset he have purchase other stock  which fall he be so far from make interest that even part of the principal be  lose but per curian payment of a legacy into the band of a infant be a good  payment wentworth office of executor and that the defendant ought to Bunbury  have do dly that wherever legacy be devise out of a real estate or there be  other real sufficient fund to answer they they shall carry interest from the  death of the testator if no time be appoint for payment but upon the authority  of the case follow they decree interest to be pay from a year after the  testator death Chan can salk title legacy vern
bilton against johnson and long c day in trespass of assault and imprisonment  the defendant as baily of the sheriff justify by latitat out of this court  testae the that of June in Tr term the plaintiff reply that the say writ be  real actual prosecute out of this court on the that of August which be after  the arrest of the plaintiff to which the defendant demurrer and Symson pray  judgement for the plaintiff but per curian this be a estople especial in case  of a baily who warrant may be before the arrest and all writ must be testae as  of the term and the sheriff not return the writ or not have any shall not  prejudice his under baily but per curian a good action will lie against the  sheriff or a baily of franchise and it be adjourn post
bilton versus johnson and other false imprisonment keb trespass and false  imprisonment in London the defendant plead that I S sue forth a writ of  latitat the last day of Trinity term direct to the sheriff of r and by virtue  of that the sheriff of the say county make a warrant to the defendant and he  upon that take the plaintiff which be the same imprisonment absq hoc that he  be guilty in London well aliter well elsewhere modus and the plaintiff reply  that the say writ be true prosecute after the imprisonment videlicet the that  of August and upon this the defendant demurrer and adjudge for the plaintiff  because although the testae of the writ be upon record and the plaintiff can  aver against it yet here great inconvenience will be if the plaintiff can set  forth the very time of the purchase of the writ and the relation of the testae  be only to prevent fraud and not justify a tort and judgement be give for the  plaintiff Raymond sir t er p rescous I lev the sheriff return a rescous  against Syms and other and the return be that a be in custody of my bailiff  the defendant rescue he out of the custody of the bailiff and Stroud move to  quash it because it ought to be out of the custody of the sheriff Twisden  justice this have be rule both way for it be good e custodian of me secundum  reality law and good e custodian ballivi urinate secundum reality fact and if  a action of the case be bring for the rescous it ought to be that he return  the prisoner be in custodian ballivi but the other justice rule that it ought  to be ex custodian viscount and upon that the return be quash Raymond sir t  term mich car b r
bind against bind prerogative court caveat day July saint objection to the  surety offer for a administrator bind overrule see pp and ante dr Simpson for  Sarah bind John bind decease leave Sarah bind his widow and six child by her  and William bind his son by a former lee wife the widow confess William  interest but he deny she which she propound administration pendent light  decree on the that march to the nominee of William because his interest be  certain he name John barn and administration be decree to he it afterward  appear there be not any person of the name of John barn and then William name  Thomas barn who upon exception be take to he the court reject he then name one  Phillips to who the court decree the administration he give l security and  notice of the surety be name for surety Mr Bradley and Mr Atkins who both  refuse to be his surety since William have so long trifle with the court we  pray that Sarah may be allow to nominate the reverend William bind uncle to  William the party to be administrator William bind have now nominate for  surety Mr hand who be his proctor at Litchfield and who act as substitute in  this cause on examination of witness by commission and be therefore a party  and another person one Adderley who life in London hand indeed swear he be  worth l and upward his debt pay but the other only swear he be worth l the  surety be bind jointly et separately and therefore both ought to be worth l  otherwise it be the same as take only one surety judgement sir george lee I be  of opinion the objection to hand as have act as substitute have no weight at  all and that it be sufficient if the surety together be worth the sum mention  in the administration bind I therefore pronounce the surety offer lee to be  sufficient for l and decree administration pendent light to pass to Phillips  the security hand and Adderley first give bind fanshaw proctor for Sarah  appeal ad statin but do not proceed on the appeal lee er p
bind against jacob and other trin geo chapel move to set aside a writ of  testatum become facias issue immediate after judgement and before a be made fa  return and file to warrant it and the court make a barn er p rule to barn show  cause Eyre for plaintiff show cause and produce a be made fa return in the  proper county and thereupon the rule be discharge
bind against palmer Belfield for defendant move for a new trial suggest the  verdict to be against evidence and rely upon the judge certificate per cur as  the cause be try before a judge of barn another court a affidavit of what pass  at the trial must be produce as a necessary foundation for this motion
bind against richardson in debt the defendant plead payment at the day and  give in evidence payment at another day before the day of payment and so be it  find by the jury in a special verdict and Anderson say we be all agree that  judgement shall be give against tiff for payment before the day be payment at  the day and judgement be give that the plaintiff shall be bar Owen er p
bind against smyth lieu winnington pray a prohibition to inferior court in  Marlborough in account of several rend collect and do not say infra jurisd  curiae after verdict and judgement quod to sum up which Keeling grant and  there be but one case and that be on h of sue out of diocese in which case no  prohibition lie after judgement the party have there agree the jurisdiction  but in all case else a prohibition lie as well after judgement Keble as before  which Twisden agree on f n b and Inst but Windham contra it be without  precedent after judgement that prohibition shall be grant in any transitory  action send curian contra and prohibition grant nisi
bind and another against jope trin geo two barn S c money not bring into court  pursuant to a rule obtain for that purpose cook a rule be make in Hilary term  last to bring S d into court subject to the taxation of Mr Laurence bill but  the money be not bring in until the d of October this term the plaintiff in  the mean time proceed to judgement which judgement be set aside upon term and  afterward a plea be plead and a motion and leave give to withdraw the same and  judgement give with stay of execution till a certain time which time be expire  execution be send down and this term the plaintiff move to set aside the rule  for bring money into court the defendant not comply with the rule in due time  on hear counsel on both side the court stop the plaintiff proceed but the  defendant be order to pay all cost to this time note the cause be afterward  compromise by consent of the party
bind and brook t Jones before Mod lev Jones error upon a judgement in the  common plea where the plaintiff declare in a action upon the case that he have  common in the defendant land to have to withhold c the defendant demurrer  because not set out how the plaintiff be entitle to the common whether by  prescription or otherwise notwithstanding which judgement in the common bench  be for the plaintiff and now the same matter insist on for error here and the  court doubt to make the declaration good there be quote the case of sand and  trefusis in cro in a action for stop of a watercourse to his mill which be  hold good without say a ancient mill or that he be entitle to the watercourse  by prescription or otherwise cro dent and Oliver a action for disturb of he to  take toll and no title set forth say adjornatur Vid   Entr judgement affirm  Jones Ventris er p
bind and green case a action of debt be bring against a administrator the  defendant show how that there be diverse judgement have against he in London  and also that there be another debt due by the testator which be assign over  unto the king majesty and so plead Godbolt that he have full administer Barker  sergeant take exception to the plead because it be not therein show that the  king do assent to the assignment and also because it be not show that the  assignment be enrol the court say nothing to the exception but whereas the  defendant as administrator do allege a retainer in his own hand for a debt due  to himself the opinion of the whole court be that the same be good and that a  administrator may retain to satisfy a debt due to himself but it be agree by  the court that a executor of his own wrong shall not net ne to satisfy his own  debt see to this purpose c part coulter case mich James in the common plead
bind and martin mich banc sum p special plea to a action of debt upon a  sheriff bind bind bring a action of debt upon a bind give unto he as sheriff  to save he harmless the defendant plead a special plea which amount unto no  more than that he have save he harmless to this plea exception be take because  he do not show how he have save he harmless to this Wadham Windham answer if  it be that he have from time to time save he harmless it be well enough roll  chief justice it be not so here and therefore let the plaintiff have judgement  nisi
bind and Mosedale fee ex motion Offley to be discharge of chamber rend for  which accord to common use and print note he give bind on take out of one  Spencer a prisoner to be a witness and to return he and to pay his chamber  rend which he tender for the time he be out but be demand for more he pray to  be discharge be illiterate and never agree for it per curian he be discharge  and the Keble er p marshal ought not to take bind for chamber rend but only to  be prisoner c but this be only to come in as allowance of fee
bind and other against jope trin geo declaration be deliver against defendant  a prisoner on the last day save one of easter term a question do arise whether  defendant shall have a imparlance till tomorrow Trin or must plead two day  before the essoinday of Trinity term upon look into the old rule touch the  delivery of declaration to prisoner by the judge in the treasury they be of  opinion that defendant must plead two day before the essoinday accord to that  rule
bind case in trespass the plaintiff declare that the defendant enter in his  land and do cut down and carry away two load of grass in the plaintiff soil in  a certain piece of ground in which the trespass be suppose to be do to strew  the floor of the church and that he cut two load march report there to estrew  the floor of the church and do not say that it be the same trespass c and it  be adjudge error but the court be clear that the prescription for cut of grass  to estrew the church be good because it be but in the nature of a easement and  so to have a washingplace in the land of another and so the custom here in  London to shoot in the land of another and so for the inhabitant of a town to  have a way over the land of another to their church but Mr roll who move the  case at the bar say that it be adjudge that inhabitant of a town by custom  shall have a easement over the freehold or in the freehold of a stranger but  not profit apprender but as I remember the plaintiff freehold lie near the  church and for that reason the court may conceive the same to be but a  easement vide h cite by justice Jones Vid Galewoods case Rep b
bind give to husband and wife during the coverture the right of the bind be in  they both and if the husband die without any disagreement to his wife be right  in it the bind shall survive to the wife say per king c in grammatical case  Copping and mich will Rep the baron may disagree to his wife be right to the  bind and bring a action on it in his own name ibidem
bind v barrow Jan bill for tithe of assart land ante pl upon a bill for tithe  of assart land baron comens seem to be of opinion that the word de to make new  assartatis assartandis in the grant of Edward the first Bunbury er p shall be  construe to extend only to such land as be at that time assarted or intend  short to be so and not to such as in future age shall happen to be assarted  especial if no tithe have usual be pay as if a man grant tithe wool of his  sheep that he shall have seven year hence if he have no sheep at that time of  grant it will be void queare hob
bind v KILLIFIT after two demurrer the plaintiff examine witness and die a  bill of revivor to have the benefit of those witnessesBut order that no  publication be have John bind late husband of the plaintiff exhibit a bill  against the defendant whereupon choice case in chancery the defendant demurrer  and yet the say John bind replayed and the defendant likewise demurrer upon  replication and after the demurrer put in the say John bind examine diverse  witness in court and die and now his wife have put in a bill of revivor to  have the benefit of the say witness it be therefore order that no publication  of the say witness so unorderly examine be publish without special order of  court bind widow plaintiff Killifit wife defendant year Elizabeth
bind v SEAW9LL SC ante this case be again argue by sergeant Hewitt for the  plaintiff and Thurlow for the defendant the sergeant take a difference between  the attestation of the act itself of make a will to which three witness be  clear requisite by the statute and the attestation that such a sheet be part  of that Act to which one witness be by commonlaw sufficient and be cite  Stonehouse and Evelyn p wms that though by the statute the testator must sign  the will yet the proof of his sign it may be by one witness only nothing else  material be add to the former argument SC post
bind versus GONSALES February in person holt c j at nisi prius at guildhall  deviation or not must be construe accord to usage S C holt stram burr Cowp Str  park case upon a policy which be to insure the WilliamGalley in a voyage from  Bremen to the port of London warrant to depart with convoy the case be the  galley set sail from Bremen under convoy of a Dutch man of war to the elb  where they be join with two other Dutch man of war and several Dutch and  English merchant ship whence they sail to the texel where they find a squadron  of English man of war and a admiral after a stay of nine week they set out  from the texel and the galley be separate in a storm and take by a French  privateer take again by a Dutch privateer and pay l savage and it be rule per  holt c j that the voyage ought to be accord to usage and that their go to the  elb though in fact out of the way be no deviation for till after the year  there be no convoy for ship direct from Bremen to London and the plaintiff  have a verdict
bind versus GONSALES February salk case upon a policy to insure the William  galley from Bremen to London warrant to depart with convoy the galley set sail  from Bremen under convoy of a Dutch man of war to the elb where they be join  by two other Dutch man of war thence they sail to the texel where they find a  squadron of English man of war and a admiral after a stay of nine week they  set out from the texel the galley be separate in a storm and take by a French  privateer take again by a Dutch privateer and pay l savage and by holt CJ rule  that the voyage ought to be accord to usage and that their go to the elb  though in fact out of the way be no deviation for till after the year there be  no convoy for ship direct from Bremen to London the plaintiff have a verdict
bind versus green administrator a action of debt bring against he as  administrator he plead diverse judgement amount to l and the assignment of l  debt to the king by deed enrol and he plead that he retain his debt in his  hand and he may have give this in evidence or plead it at the liberty of the  defendant the venire facias misawarded
bind versus isaac Monday saint November to know facias against bail after a  exoneretur order though not enter irregular see east the exoneretur which have  be order to be enter V ante be not actual enter on the bailpiece by the  omission of the proper officer who ought to have enter it but the plaintiff  himself be apprise of the surrender though his attorney swear that he the  attorney have no notice of it the plaintiff attorney not be apprise of the  surrender of the principal sue out to know faciases against the bail who pay  the money but they be sue out into London where the original cause of action  be and not into Middlesex where the surrender be make and where the bailpiece  remain the bail have apply upon both these irregularity videlicet first the  plaintiff be apprise of the surrender and order of the court and dly the to  know faciases not be sue out into Middlesex that the to know faciases may be  set aside for irregularity with cost and the money restore Mr Norton be  counsel for the bail and have move as above sir Richard Lloyd for the  plaintiff now show cause the court be clear on both point that the to know  faciases be irregular sue out and grant Mr Norton motion by make the rule  absolute as pray except only that they omit the cost because it will have be  to no purpose to have order they as the plaintiff himself who be apprise of  the surrender be go abroad and the attorney not be apprise of it have not act  with any ill design or intention to oppress
bind versus moil in a action of debt for l S and d the plaintiff declare that  whereas the defendant by a certain bill Obligatory understand see to withhold  indebitat before to the plaintiff top twenty and eight a balance two solid  quatuor denar to loosen to express grief c ad well super fivepercent tax  rionum they of seven who foret year Dorn pro true solution fourteen librar One  solidi quatuor denar ipse the defendant obligasset see really per the same  billam and in facto to say quod the say moil non to loosen to express grief  the say l S and d upon the say that of September per quod action to grow  progressively to this the defendant demurrer and it be adjudge for the  plaintiff for though it be not draw proper as a penal bill for the payment of  the l c yet there be enough to ground a action of debt for the l S d and the  day of payment seem to refer to the l S and d vide cro Ventris note it be the  common course to declare in common banc per scribe indentat without say seal  adorned with small figures but it be otherwise in b r
Binfield v lambert may a will execute and attest accord to the statute though  two only of the witness can be find to be examine the trust be nevertheless  order to be carry into execution in this case the will be execute by the  testator and attest by three witness agreeable to the statute and the bill  pray that the will may be declare well prove and be establish and the trust  decree to be perform and carry into execution c two of the witness be examine  who prove the due execution and attestation of the will but the three witness  can not be find though advertise of which there be proof at the hear of the  cause before sir Thomas clarke m r a difficulty arise what the court can do  the plaintiff counsel press his honour to declare the will well prove his  honour answer that the will can not be say to be strict prove agreeable to the  statute but his conscience be satisfy as to the proof of it he be and he  accord do direct the trust to be perform and carry into execution the case of  bird v butler before Mr baron Eyre sit for the Lord chancellor that July be  circumstance exact as the precede with this difference that the three witness  who can not be find have not be advertise for the judge do not declare the  will well prove but only direct the trust to be perform and carry into  execution see in Stokes v tailor begin dick
binge and Hodges in Binge and Hodges case one of the juror be name Richard  smith in all the process against the juror and after the trial ware move in  arrest of judgement for that that rise smith be swear upon the trial and not  Richard and by the court he can make such a averment against a record for then  a affidavit overthrow a trial and that which be aid by James cap be when a  juror be name by one name in one place of the record and by another name in a  other place of the record there now it shall be aid upon this statute by  averment that he be the same man c
Bingham on the demise OF lane and other against gregg in ejectment trinity geo  rule on the statute that Geo to show cause why proceed shall not be stay on  payment of the mortgagemoney and cost be make absolute lessors of the  plaintiff assignee of the mortgagee insist to be pay a bind and a simple  contract debt due to themselves in their own right per cur a bind be no lie in  equity unless where the heir come to redeem prime for plaintiff Bootle for  defendant
Bingham v Bingham October approve Cooper v Phibbs l r h l see Roger v Ingham  Ch d observe upon Jones v Clifford Ch d see bettes v Maynard lt joliffe v  baker Q b d approve Huddersfield Banking company v Lister Ch master of the  bolls for Lord chancellor MistakeEquity relieve against bargain make under a  misconception of right see cook v Pratt Ves sen and Ramsden v Hylton Ves sen a  agreement be make for the sale of a estate to the plaintiff by defendant who  have bring a ejectment in support of a title thereto under a will for the fact  of the case see supplement p the bill be to have the purchase money refund as  it appear to have be the plaintiff estate it be insist that it be the  plaintiff own fault to who the title be produce and who have time to consider  it decree for the plaintiff with cost and interest for the money from the time  of bring the bill for though no fraud appear vesey senior and the defendant  apprehend he have a right yet there be a plain mistake Ves sen such as the  court be warrant to relieve against and not to suffer the defendant to run  away with the money in consideration of the sale of a estate to which he have  no right Reg lib a fol
Bingham v warren a bill without a counsellor hand or attorney retain dismiss  it be inform that the plaintiff exhibit his bill without a counsellor band or  retain a attorney and the same be for matter former decree therefore order if  cause be not show to the contrary and if the bill be to bring the matter in  question that be decree then it be to be dismiss Bingham plaintiff warren  defendant year Elizabeth
bingly and Warcop executor on motion for money out of court bring in by the  sheriff on a vend set forth testae before but after commission of bankrupt  take out the court say that unless the good be seize before the party become a  bankrupt though they be seize before the testae of the commission yet the good  be bind by the bankruptcie but unless the commissioner show cause on notice  the court on James cap order the money to be deliver to the plaintiff and  leave the commissioner to trover against he but if any have appear for they  they say the plaintiff may be put to see fa against the commissioner see Baily  and Bunnings case
binjon will versus stone Lord chancellor Lord chief baron hale and Mr justice  Wyndham car sir George binjon purchase a house for pound in the name of his  son a infant of five year old and the same be convey to his son by a deed  enrol all the estate of sir George be expose to sale by the parliament for his  delinquency this house be sell as part of his estate to one stone who after  sir George son come of age give he and his mother pound to make a far  conveyance of the house to he which they do have both make oath that they be  not trustee for sir George Nelson sir George afterward exhibit his bill to be  relieve against stone and suggest a trust in his wife and his son for himself  and it be insist that it shall be presume as such a trust in respect of the  infancy of the son when the purchase be make by the father and that the money  be pay by he and that the sale of the house be in his right and for his  delinquency and so the Lord chancellor incline to decree it but a offer be  make to repay stone the pound time be give to the party to consider of it and  if they do not agree the court declare they will advice with some judge about  it for hale and Wyndham hold it to be a trust upon Nelson er p which sir  George may be relieve and thereupon stone accept the pound he be decree to  reconvey
Binmore and bowler when a person who have escape be retake what prison he  shall be commit to Mr agar have obtain a rule that a person take on a escape  warrant and commit to Newgate may be redeliver to the marshal in execution  upon account of his have escape upon a day rule but now motion be make that  that rule may be discharge upon a affidavit that he be not out upon a day rule  when he do escape and accord the court grant the motion
Binstead v coleman July equity will not supply a defect in a write agreement  intend to be insert in it this distinction be lie down upon the statute of  fraud and perjury that where there be a whole agreement by parole and part of  it be execute a court of equity will decree a specific execution of the whole  for the statute of fraud say the chief baron do not extend to that but where  there be a agreement by write execute you can come by evidence to supply any  defect in that agreement which be intend to be part of that agreement but not  insert in it for that will be to evade the statute of fraud and introduce more  perjury the whole court be of the same opinion
Binsted v BAREROOT July on a application by one Anderson who be concern as  agent in London for a country solicitor to discharge a order for tax a bill of  fee and disbursement Lord Hardwicke c declare that agency business do not come  within the act of parliament and discharge the order see Jones v Robert sim in  re smith Beav
Binsted v collins may prohibition the ordinary can punish a single trespass on  the body of the church if it do not hinder divine service libel in the  spiritual court against Binsted churchwarden but it do not appear he be so in  the proceed for break a hole in the church wall and cut down the bough of a  large yewtree in the churchyard notam there be a decree in the spiritual court  for twentysix pound cost praeter feod admonition execution the same admonition  now upon show cause why a prohibition shall not go it be insist against a  prohibition that this be a matter proper for the jurisdiction of the spiritual  court and that a man may be punish for the same fact in different respect and  cite salk side Goldsb godb that the parson have a freehold in the church yard  for the benefit of the church Bulst Ro Rep Noy Bunbury for the prohibition it  be say that the parson have the right or remedy as well as the freehold and  consequent may have a action cro bro trespass that it be not too late for a  prohibition even after sentence if the proceed be in person non judge Noy cro  Elizabeth Het Bunbury er p per curian the ordinary can punish a single  trespass commit on the body of the church which do not hinder the service  which be the case of the statute of circumspect Agatisde church  discoopertaextends to and which be not allege in the libel the rector who have  the freehold in he have a right to bring his action and therefore it will be  hard to subject this man to a double prosecution and the expense here though  proper cost be in the nature of damage but the plaintiff may if be think fit  declare in prohibition
birch against visne in debt on article of agreement to deliver hop at worster  powis move to change the when which the court deny be debt on a specialty  unless it appear by the specialty that it be make in another county or that  the party by plead of payment or other plea can draw it into another county
birch attorney against grave defendant be arrest at plaintiff suit in a action  for fee c enter into a bailbond with surety which for want of bail above be  assign and action bring thereon wherein plaintiff declare defendant plead non  be factum and after verdict for plaintiff at last assize chapel move for leave  to file bail in the original action on payment of cost and consent that  plaintiff may take judgement on the bailbond to stand as a security for what  he shall recover and produce a affidavit from defendant that he never in his  own separate capacity employ plaintiff as his attorney and that he have a good  defence in this action a rule be make to show cause which be afterward make  absolute chapel for defendant Eyre and wright for plaintiff
birch executor against Douglass hill geo plaintiff testator have execute a  letter of licence to defendant for five year which be not expire at the time  defendant be arrest and hold to bail at barn er p plaintiff suit baines move  that defendant may be discharge upon enter a common appearance but the court  deny the motion be of opinion that enter into the question about the letter of  licence which can not amount to more than a release be enter into the merit of  the cause
birch v Barston equity case abridge n er the bill be bring by the late  churchwarden against the succeed churchwarden to oblige they to make a rate  accord to a order of vestry to reimburse they several sum of money lie out by  order of vestry for repair of the church and building two new gallery and  their account have at their go out of their office be take by auditor appoint  by the parish and pass and allow by the vestry and a order of vestry make for  make a rate to reimburse they it be object at the hear that the succeed  churchwarden be out of their office and new one choose the court can give they  no relief and per Hutchins this be a material objection but Trevor content if  the nature of the case will admit of relief but per cur they can it be relieve  but they must take their remedy against such particular parishioner as employ  they or else in the spiritual court the money for the repair be all pay and  the remainder due be for the gallery east Battely and cook Prec in Chan vern  SC birch and Barston all churchwarden of Lambeth Trin W m in this court be  cite arg where the court decree the plaintiff who be late churchwarden to be  pay the money he have lie out for the use of the parish with cost and then the  decree go on and say for which purpose the vestry of the say parish be to take  notice hereof videlicet of the decree and set a rate accord and what the  churchwarden shall pay in obedience to this decree the same be to be bring  into their account and to be allow they by the parish when they pass their  account the reporter in a note say that there be the like word in a v former  decree February car James and rich all which decree be cite in the above  decree of W m and be read at the hear of the Cause ibidem
birch versus wood hill W B R curate be removable at the will of the parson  case B R S C Vide ves Doug Cowp wood pretend to be curate of a chapel of ease  in the parish of Preston sue the vicar of the parish in the spiritual court  for the arrear of a pension claim by prescription and a prohibition be grant  nisi causan for that the curate be removable at the will of the parson and so  can prescribe but his remedy must be by quantum to deserve vide Faresl that  parishbounds be not to be prove by the parson Salkeld er p pauper
birchall v SMETHURST proviso not to commit waste whether it be a covenant or a  condition Yelv cro Ro Abr c dyer Leon lev Tomlys c Edward foe b lev pordage v  coal raym SC sand SC I lev Mod pale yellow Rep keb Bac Abr this be a action of  covenant upon a indenture of lease for cut down five oak c the question arise  upon these word proviso that if the lessee shall commit wilful waste then the  lease shall determine and cease upon a demurrer the only question be whether  these word proviso c shall be construe to be word of condition or covenant for  if it shall be take to be a condition then a breach of covenant be improper  assign and judgement ought to be for the defendant of which opinion be the  whole court for though a proviso may amount either to a condition or covenant  yet that must be when the intent of the party lead to such construction  respective but there be no such intention nor any necessity here to construe  it a covenant for there be other Bunbury provision in the lease by way of  covenant for the benefit of the lessor Mr Bootle who demurrer for the  defendant Mr fazakerly for the plaintiff
BIRCHMAN and NORIGHT in ejectment where the lessor of the plaintiff be a  infant security must be give for cost in a ejectment bring by a infant a  motion be make for a rule to compel the lessor of the plaintiff to make a real  lessee who may be responsible or to give security for the payment of the cost  this be determine to be the course of the court in the case of Throgmorton and  smith on the demise of miller Kel pi Barnard b r stram and before in the case  of Noke and Wyndham stram a rule for that purpose be grant and see bar Cowp  bull n p III
BIRCHMAN vers NORIGHT where lessor be a infant security must be give for cost  in a ejectment bring by a infant a motion be make for a rule to compel the  lessor of the plaintiff to make a real lessee who may be responsible or to  give security for the payment of the cost this be determine to be the course  of the court in the case of Throgmorton and smith on the demise miller Paso  Geo Stran and before in the case of Noke v Windham Paso Geo a rule for that  purpose be grant
bird against watson trover in trover of a sword whereof the plaintiff be  possess ut de good not common with others and that the defendant to take in  hand eaden good to which declaration the defendant demurrer because it be  uncertain and have faux Latin and Twisden incline it be ill Keble as in action  sur case on forgery of faux deed and count but on one deed send curian contra  and judgement pro plaintiff nisi
bird alias bell against bird arch court easter term may that in a matrimonial  suit where alimony be due it be to be pay before the hear of the cause dr hay  for bell this be a cause of nullity of marriage by reason of a former bring by  bird against bell his wife after live with her fifteen year and have eight  child by her the court allow her a year for alimony Payable quarterly pen the  suit a year alimony be due the that of April last the cause will be hear next  term by which time another quarter will be due we pray that the court will  decree her a year and quarter be alimony to be pay before the cause be hear  and will tax the bill of cost lee judgment sir george lee I be of opinion I  can only order such alimony to be pay as be now due and that it be not usual  to tax the full bill of cost but only to allow money on account for hear the  cause and therefore order that now due to her for alimony and for hear the  cause shall be pay to her before the cause shall be hear lee er p
bird alias bell against bird arch court Hilary term February that a allegation  in a suit touch the validity of a marriage plead irrelevant dr hay for mrs  Elizabeth bird Thomas bird bring a suit of nullity of marriage against his  wife Elizabeth bird by reason of her former marriage in the commissary of  saint Paul court she appeal from admit some article of the libel the appeal be  pronounce for and now we plead that in April she marry Robert bell who in four  or five month after desert her and she have never see he since that bird  solicit her and her parent to marry he and assure her upon enquiry that bell  be dead that with consent of her parent she marry bird in by licence and be  swear her to be a widow and live with he as his wife till lee when be turn her  out of door and she have have by he eight child judgement sir george lee I be  of opinion there be nothing in this allegation relevant and therefore reject  it the single question be whether bell be live at the time she marry bird for  if he be her marriage to bird be clear void and there be not a word in this  allegation to show bell be dead at that time but as the case appear to be very  hard upon the woman I will not conclude the cause but give her to the first  day of next term to see whether she can discover that bell be dead before she  marry bird and may if she can make such discovery have a opportunity to plead  it
bird and christopher mich banc sup extinguishment of a proviso in a deed in  this case upon give of a evidence in a trespass and ejectment it be say by  roll chief justice that if I do feoff I S with a proviso contain in the deed  that it shall be lawful for I to revoke this feoff and afterward I levy a fine  to I S of the same land this be a extinguishment of the proviso of revocation
bird and Harrison bird bring a writ of error against Harrison upon a judgement  in a to know facias in c b where the case be judgement be give against a  testator who die and make bird executor against who a become facias be take  out and no one good return upon which a to know facias and enquiry and return  that Skinner diverse good of the Skinner er p testator come to his hand and  that he to visit good testator to place here and there to remove ad propium  use to turn round bird now appear and never have appear before but suffer  judgement to pass by default come and plead that he be never executor or  administer as executor and traverse without hoc that he good testator to place  here and there c whereupon issue be join and find against bird and judgement  and now assign for error that the issue be ill for that be may convert and  dispose good testator and yet judgement ought not to be give that execution  shall be de good not common with others as he may come to the good by sale in  marketovert c and that this conversion will not be any hindrance of the  execution but the court say in this case he beginning and plead ne unques  executor dare not abide thereby but go over to the conversion which shall be  intend a conversion as executor accord to the point of the inquiry and return  be that he as executor have convert c and he come and traverse the conversion  this shall be intend the conversion intend in the return it be find against he  wherefore affirma
bird executor of smith against foster the young trin g in assumpsit plaintiff  have lie his action in London and declare with a profert of letter  testamentary from the bishop court at Durham obtain a rule to show cause why  he shall not amend the declaration by lie the venue in Northumberland instead  of London on show cause the court discharge the rule it not be usual to amend  the venue at plaintiff instance unless where the action by Act of parliament  be confine to a particular county such as the Westminster bridge Act c and  plaintiff by mistake lie it in another county simple contract debt follow the  person of the debtor specialty be asset where find in this case the amendment  pray seem to be to make good a administration which probable be void in law  Bootle and win for defendant prime for plaintiff
bird for smith Trin Geo two b r action by administrator discontinue who  afterward bring a fresh action g action be bring by a administrator who  afterward discontinue his action without payment of cost by leave of the court  the administrator afterward bring a fresh action which be ground upon the same  Cause of action and now Mr S counsel move to stay proceed in the second action  till the administrator have pay the cost of the first if the court will put no  restraint upon executor and administrator in affair of this nature it give  they a great latitude of be vexatious they may discontinue action upon action  and yet the party be without remedy or redress but the court refuse the motion  and say they will put no term upon executor or administrator if they be  nonsuit or a verdict go against they they pay no cost
bird plaintiff against ASTCOCK defendant action upon the case for a trover and  conversion Ro Abr Ro Rep in a special action upon the case bring by the  plaintiff against the defendant be a carrier a boatman for a trover and  conversion of his good to he deliver and they miscarry two action by he bring  the one a trespass the other a trover and conversion upon a motion now make  the rule of the court be that he shall proceed in one of the action only S in  the trover and conversion coke there be a case resolve in the c b when I be  there concern Gravesend barge in which be a great number of passenger one  there have a pack of great value and of great weight in the barge there sudden  happen a very great storm and they be all in great danger and be for their own  safety enforce to throw out a great part of the good for the safeguard of  their life which be then in the barge among which good for the lightning of  the barge this pack of good be throw over afterward he which be the owner of  this pack bring his action upon the case against the bargeman for these his  good thus cast over and we all there do resolve it clear that this be the act  of God this sudden storm which occasion the throw over of the good and can not  be avoid and for this cause he recover nothing upon this reason be the case in  Elizabeth in Dalisons report where one be bind to keep and maintain the sea  wall from overflow if this happen by his negligence this shall he waste  otherwise if it so happen by the act of God sudden and so unavoidable the  whole court agree with he herein Bulstrode er p
bird vers major if a new Act of parliament make a description of person liable  to be bankrupt who be not before within the bankrupt law they may be make  bankrupt in respect of any act which be before act of bankruptcy a man be not  liable to be a bankrupt in respect of a share which he have in the stock of a  private trade fraternity upon a issue direct in chancery to be try before the  Lord chief justice holt for his opinion the case upon the trial before he at  guildhall the sit after Lord Raymond this term appear to be thus a scrivener  who be not liable to be a bankrupt before the statute of James c commit a act  which be make a act of bankruptcy by the statute of I James c videlicet  abscond c and he have also a share in the stationer company and the question  be whether he be not a bankrupt by that and holt chief justice hold that since  the James c have make a scrivener liable to be a bankrupt it bad subject he to  all the old act which by the former statute make a man a bankrupt as well as  to the act mention in the statute of James c but as to the share in the  stationer company he seem to incline that that will not make he a bankrupt see  for that the car c where it enact that the have a share in the east India  company c will not make a mail a bankrupt and a judgement give to the contrary  in be by the say Act declare illegal but the Lord keeper hold the scrivener to  be a bankrupt by both the point upon the importunity of the counsel it be  reserve as a case as to both point for the further consideration of the chief  justice
bird versus bird Trin Ann B R Qure if a award of money to be pay to a three  person be good unless it appear to be for the benefit of one of the party lev  lev sand keb debt upon a bind the defendant pray oyer of the condition which  be for perform the award of I S and plead nul agard fait the plaintiff reply  and set forth a award which be that the plaintiff and defendant shall pay such  a certain sum yearly to a for the use of mrs bird their mother Mr Broderick  take a exception to the award that this be to award a thing to be do to a  three person who be a stranger to the submission and consequent of a matter  out of the power of the arbitrator holt chief justice be of opinion that a  general award of money to a stranger be good for it shall be intend the  submittants be bind as trustee or be liable to pay the same and the payment  shall be intend for their benefit unless the contrary appear Powell justice  contra it must appear to be for their benefit and it shall not be so intend  unless it do appear but in the principal case be hold that it shall be intend  to be for their benefit or rather that it appear to be so because the payment  be to be for the use of the mother vide   salmon case cro Ro lev afterward the  matter be refer to the counsel on both side so no judgement be give
bird versus BLOSSE see Chan Rep the case be thus one write a letter signify  his assent to the marriage of his daughter with I S and that he will give her  l and afterward by another letter upon a further treaty concern the marriage  he go back from the proposal of his letter and at some time after declare that  he will agree to what be propose in his first letter this letter be hold a  sufficient promise in write within the statute of car call the statute against  fraud and perjury and that the last declaration have set the term in the first  letter up again
bird versus Sedgwick Pas W m B R a English subject trade from foreign part  hither may be a bankrupt raym Jon vern a gentleman of the temple go from hence  to Lisbon where he turn factor and trade to England and break blench argue  that the statute about bankrupt do not extend to person out of the realm the  subject of they be case of arrest outlawry and depart out of the realm and the  James which extend to Salkeld er p alien be only alien resident here yet the  court hold he a bankrupt by reason of his trade hither and back again which  gain he a credit here per cur on a trial at bar a a the follow case which be  connect in Mr cook bankrupt law to contain the whole doctrine upon this  subject dodsworth v Anderson raym Jon vern a who live in Ireland but often  come to England and buy good which he sell in Ireland and at one time sell  good in England and at another in Ireland to be deliver in England be hold a  trader within the bankrupt law ex part smith before Lord Hardwicke cite Cowp a  person who go from England to barbados where he be a factor and planter and  trade to England by send good from his plantation and receive good back again  buy in England and dispose of good in barbados for merchant in England as a  factor be hold subject to the bankrupt law ex part Williamson atk Lord  Hardwicke say if a person carry on a trade in one kingdom belong to the crown  of great Britain and come over to another a commission may be take out where  be happen to be Alexander v Vaughan Cowp a native of Scotland trade and reside  there come to England and be there occasional be arrest and lie in prison two  month and be rule to be within the bankrupt law Mr cook from these case make  the follow deduction any person trade to England whether native denizen or  alien though never resident as a trader in England may be a bankrupt if be  occasional come to this country and commit a act of bankruptcy the statute be  as to the act of bankruptcy confine to England cook d edit
bird versus stroud Trin W salk cro vent in action on the case the plaintiff  declare that he be possess of a tenement to which he have and ought to have  common of pasture in a certain place the defendant have dig coneyboroughs  there per quod c to this declaration there be a demurrer upon which the  plaintiff have judgement in c b and on a writ of error in this court that  judgement be affirm the objection be that the plaintiff have not show any  title to this common by grant or prescription holt CJ the action be ground  upon the possession and by what appear the defendant be a mere stranger beside  the title be not traversable but to be give in evidence upon the trial of the  issue therefore it need not be show and so it be adjudge
bird versus stroud Trin will B R where the action be ground on the possession  the plaintiff needs not show a title S C comens Mod Mod skin comb case c in  which the plaintiff declare that he be possess of a tenement to which he have  and ought to have a way and to which he have and ought to have common of  pasture in v the defendant have dig coneyboroughs there per quod c upon  demurrer to this declaration the defendant have judgement in c b and now upon  a writ of error in B R that judgement be affirm the objection be that the  plaintiff have not show any title to this common either by grant or  prescription and adjudge he need not because the action be ground upon the  possession and it do not appear but that the defendant be a mere stranger  beside the title be not traversable but to be give in evidence upon the trial  of the issue a cro cro car sand for trefusis vent S p cro et a vide Str will  Bl r comens action for disturbance b pleader c
birk against Simson   Litt b a devise his land to b his cousin and publish  that will and after upon communication with some of the friend of the say b a  say if she will not come to I and live c she shall not have one penny worth of  my good and land and at another time speak word to the same purpose but never  make any mention of his will or revocation of that nor call any to testify  that but only speak that in communication as abovesaid and adjudge to be no  revocation and sir John jeffrys case be vouch that a have make his will  private Noy and be sick he be request by his friend to make his will or if he  will make any he answer no yet adjudge no revocation and another case be vouch  that a have make his Noy er p will and leave it at Fulham and be sick in  London he say to some present there my will at Fulham shall not stand and that  be adjudge a good revocation see dyer
birk and leek vide Mr reeves now say that this case stand for the resolution  of the court the chief justice say that they be of opinion as to the first  exception that there be no variance between the original and declaration and  as to the second exception they rely upon the case of rowning and Lord  Carteret so affirm the judgement
Birkbeck against Hugh Skinner move for judgement against the casual ejector  the affidavit set out that deponent do serve a b tenant in possession or c his  wife per cur it be not certain as to either No rule
Birket v BERESEY land assure for jointure or marriage never effect be decree  against the woman certain land be assure to the defendant Katherine for a  jointure upon a marriage intend with one Paslow which marriage be never effect  but the say kathrine after marry the other defendant and never claim the say  land till of late that the same be come into the hand of diverse purchaser now  plaintiff and the feoff make be intend conditional though by fraud make  absolute to be void if the marriage take not effect upon repayment of pound  which wag repay therefore decree for the plaintiff if no cause be show to the  contrary by a day Birket and other plaintiff Beresey and Katherine his wife  defendant year Elizabeth choice case in chancery er p
Birkhead versus an archbishop York pasch James rotulo a quare hinder bring for  the vicarage of Leeds in Yorkshire the archbishop claim nothing but as  ordinary and plead further that the church become void the first of January a  James and that six month have elapse by reason whereof he collate the December  and cook the incumbent plead the same plea the plaintiff reply and confess the  avoidance the first of January but be further say that within the six month to  wit the of may c he present his clerk and the archbishop refuse to admit he  and afterward to wit the of may the bishop collate and the defendant demurrer  for the doubleness of the plea if the incumbent plead good matter for his  presentation although the bishop plead insufficient that shall not prejudice  the clerk and the defendant take exception to the plaintiff writ because it  bear date the of may the presentment be the of may and the refusal of the  bishop be the say of may and he collate the of may and so the writ be bring  before the refusal make by the archbishop dominus recently king jacobus versus  Eviscopum roffen all hill James rotulo a quare hinder bring for the church of  Milton near Gravesend in ken and the issue be that queen Elizabeth be seize of  the advowson of the say church c and upon trial of the issue the jury find it  special by which it appear that the queen have title but at two turn and the  bishop have one turn and because it appear to the court that the queen have  title to that turn therefore a writ be award to the bishop for the king
BIRKMYR versus darnel mich Ann B R Intr Pas Ann rot ld raym S c see S C ld  raym with note Mod case S C by name of Bour Kamire for darnel roll Abr where  the defendant come only in aid of another so that there be a remedy against  both it be a collateral promise and void by the statute of fraud otherwise  where the whole credit be give to the defendant declaration that in  consideration the plaintiff will deliver his gelding to a the defendant  promise that a shall redeliver he safe and evidence be that the defendant  undertake that a shall redeliver he safe and this be hold a collateral  undertake for another for where the undertaker come in aid only to procure a  credit to the party in that case there be a remedy against both and both be  answerable accord to their distinct engagement but where the whole credit be  give to the undertaker so that the other party be but as his servant and there  be no remedy against he this be not a collateral undertake but it be otherwise  in the principal case for the plaintiff may maintain detinue upon the bailment  against the original hirer as well as a assumpsit upon the promise against  this defendant this be upon a case state at the trial for the opinion of the  court judgement be give for the defendant b Salkeld et per cur if two come to  a shop and one buy and the other to gain he credit promise the seller if he do  not pay you will this be a collateral undertake and void without write by the  statute of fraud but if he say let he have the good will be your paymaster or  I will see you pay this be a undertake as for himself and he shall be intend  to be the very buyer and the other to act but as his servant b Vid will will  lev Cowp burr t r h Bl Com action upon assumpsit f d edit saint vol p note a  from all the authority it appear conformable to the doctrine in this case that  if the person for who use the good c be furnish be liable at all any other  person promise be void except in write
biron vers fillip practice per curian there must be the same notice of execute  a to know become inquiry as a common writ of inquiry stead v lateward pos anon  pale yellow Rep in b r S p Copeley v Delaney prac Reg   can of prac Tilney v  Watson S p in c b strange report er p
birt v pit June upon the cause be bring to hear the bill be retain with  liberty for the defendant to bring a ejectment which be try this day a new  trial be grant upon payment of the cost of the former
BIRTCH against weaver covenant in dell Br levins move in arrest of judgement  on Cr Perrot against Austin and Edward because debt lie not on covenant to pay  so much a hundred for hop deliver be not a thing execute as Cr Syclemore  against simons be but executory and ground on article that contain mutual  covenant but per Windham f n b be express that debt lie on any covenant where  the sum be reducible to a certainty Keble which the court agree judgement pro  plaintiff nisi so h in covenant Br
bisco lessor OF stride against dr HOLTE chancellor of a cathedral be enable by  stat h to make lease SC I side keb in evidence to a jury at the bar in  ejectment on a lease make by the chancellor of a cathedral church not be  confirm by the dean and chapter there be a doubt make whether this be for  twentyone year or three life shall bind the successor within the statute h c  or not and by the whole court it shall bind without confirmation for he be a  prebendary and more for he have a prebend and beside that he be a dignitary  and be seize in fee in right of his church within the word of the statute and  they will not permit it to be find special as it levinz er p be desire by the  attorneygeneral for they say they will not have it make a doubt note in cro  watkinson against man it be adjudge on a special verdict that a lease by a  prebendary shall bind the successor and it be there say by Fenner to have be  so adjudge in the case of a treasurer of a church but see Inst b where a  prebendary be take as a parson or vicar not to have the whole fee in he levinz  and note the statute except parson and vicar but not prebend and hide say that  precentor of old foundation be enable by the statute but otherwise perhaps of  new foundation and whereas a case be cite in the exchequer that lease make by  the chapter of Paul ought to be confirm hide say that they be not proper  chanter but of the lesser order and only sing man but chanter presenter c be  of the great order
Biscoe esquire versus kennedy and his wife c b debt upon a bind by the wife  dumb sola she and her husband outlaw and her separate good take in execution I  see SC I bro c c n in debt upon a bind enter into by the wife dumb sola the  husband be go abroad and outlaw and the wife although she appear public be  waive and now it be move to set aside the outlawry against the wife and to  restore her the good take upon the capias utlagatum which be swear to be her  separate good but per curian we must take the good to be the husband in point  of law and if she have any equitable right to they she must go to a court of  equity as she appear public she have be wrongful outlaw therefore let the rule  be absolute for set aside the outlawry against the wife and be discharge as to  the restore the good Davy for plaintiff Hewitt for defendant
Biscoe versus cartwright Wednesday Nov I g in court where a default of  surrender a copyhold shall be supply vide ante Abr Eq c c Peer will this be a  bill bring to have the defect of a surrender of copyhold land to the use of a  will supply in this court for the benefit of the wife under who the plaintiff  claim as a purchaser but there be much litigation whether the wife be not  otherwise ample provide for out of the testator freehold and personal estate  accord to the fortune she bring he which be say to be upward of pound and the  defendant the heir at law as be allege have no other provision make for he but  the copyhold which be not above pound per Ann the court say they can Gilbert  make no decree in it till those fact be ascertain and so send it to a master  to inquire and report it special
biscow against montage Saturday Nov condition in debt on obligation  conditional to seal a deed and to perform the covenant the defendant plead be  do seal and perform the covenant but do not set forth the covenant for which  cause the plaintiff demurrer and judgement pro plaintiff Keble er p because  per curian be must set they forth that the court may judge of their  sufficiency
bishop against Corbet debt for tithe if it lie in the county court No  prohibition to inferior court without a suggestion a prohibition be pray to  the countycourt for stay a suit there in debt for tithe on a justice for that  it be not debt is owed ex shrinking but ex fault find on a statute whereof the  sheriff have no power to hold plea and the justice do not enlarge his  jurisdiction to other action but only enable he to bold plead of great sum  than by his ordinary jurisdiction be can and it be further move that the  prohibition in this case be grantable without a suggestion enter because it be  in nature of a supersedeas which the court deny but they hold this to be a  case very considerable and therefore direct a suggestion and a declaration  thereupon that the defendant may plead or demurrer thereto so that the case  may come judicial before the court
bishop against Corbet Tuesday Nov ante tithe on Saturday last after I go into  the exchequerchamber it be say that the court incline strong a action of debt  for tithe will not lie by justities be but a commission which be always to  draw tight law and must be understand to give that court power only in action  of debt arise ex shrinking and not ex fault and the court direct rather to  bring a writ of faux judgement in c b which be depend the court refuse to  grant any prohibition otherwise else they agree it may be grant as well after  judgement as before and the jurisdiction of that court may well enough be  examine in a prohibition
bishop against Fitzherbert mich banc sup arrest of judgement in a action for  word bishop bring a action upon the case against Fitzherbert for speak these  word of he thou art a thief and have steal horse upon not guilty plead and a  verdict find for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that as the  word be lie in the declaration they be not actionable for it be incertain of  who they be speak the declaration be thus that the defendant colloquium babens  cum to express grief in the presence of other dixit meaning the plaintiff thou  art a thief and have steal horse the court at the first move of this case  incline the word be actionable because it shall be intend they be speak of the  plaintiff though it be not direct say so and afterward it be move again the  court hold the word well enough lie to bear a action because upon the whole  record the word plain appear to be speak of the plaintiff and therefore  judgement be give for he
bishop against tithe ex motion head to change a venue in action upon the case  for sue for tithe of hop contrary to modus of S per pound in the wile of  Sussex lie in Middlesex the court conceive this action will not lie though  falsely wickedly scienter c the court refuse it because Keble of partiality in  the county of Sussex ken c but at last alter it to Essex
bishop against warner and other the commissioner of excise fine the plaintiff  be a brewer accord to the new act in for not pay the duty of excise and upon a  return make that he have no good whereof a distress can be take they imprison  he whereupon he bring a action of falseimprisonment in the court of king bench  and the defendant pray that the action may be lie here because the cause  cocerns the king revenue say non allocatur per curian because this fine do not  immediate concern the revenue of excise but be a penalty impose for a offence  commit in it and it belong no more to this court than other like case arise  upon fine and imprisonment otherwise if it have immediate concern the king  revenue
bishop and reeve assumpsit assumpsit as a administrator on a agreement to pay  l a year and the testator to find a light horse for five year the action be  non assumpsit and the verdict for the plaintiff and judgement affirm in error  out of c b
bishop and turner case in a prohibition it be hold by the whole court that for  such thing as a churchwarden do ration duty no action will lie by his  successor against he in the spiritual court and a churchwarden be not a  officer but a minister to the spiritual court but it be hold that a  churchwarden by the commonlaw may maintain a action upon the case for deface  of a monument in the church trin James in the king bench
bishop executrix against Huggins hill geo plaintiff testator recover a  interlocutory judgement against defendant and die before the execution of a  writ of inquiry the judgement be revive by plaintiff as executrix and a writ  of inquiry be execute before Lord chief justice at sit when defendant agree to  pay plaintiff for damage and cost this sum be pay into the hand of Mr boson  plaintiff attorney who also have be concern for testator in this and other  cause boson pay plaintiff and keep the remain give plaintiff a note to account  for the surplus if any shall appear after payment of his bill of cost  plaintiff afterward employ another attorney and apply to the court against  boson that he may pay the to her deduct only such cost as be due from her  since the time of her husband death when she become plaintiff and employ boson  and obtain a rule to show cause which be discharge on hear counsel on both  side the court be of opinion that they ought not to interpose in this case but  plaintiff may bring her action against boson if she think fit Eyre for  plaintiff chapel and Skinner for boson hill geo one barn a attorney in  Cumberland have order from a defendant to plead for he and he send direction  to Mr barn eadnell his agent so to do but eadnell neglect to plead judgement  pass against defendant by default defendant move against barn and a rule be  make upon he to show cause why he shall not make defendant satisfaction he be  answerable for his agent default upon show cause it appear there be a just  debt due to plaintiff of and the cost have a plea be plead will have be great  increase so that defendant be benefit and not prejudice by suffer judgement to  go by default if defendant can have make a just defence and no debt have be  due in case of a gross and wilful neglect the court will have punish the  attorney but there be no reason for it in this case rule discharge chaple for  defendant birch for barn
bishop OF chester against jones slander in action upon the case in temptation  to sin great man and l damage to lift up fa go to the bishop of Bangor return  that he have sequester but have receive no profit which by Maynard for the  defendant be ill this be but as a be made fa the ordinary can sequester much  less turn the defendant out of possession of parsonage as here he have do  which the court agree and restitution award nisi
bishop OF Rochesters case the bishop of Rochester bring a writ of annuity  against the dean and chapter of Rochester and declare of a annuity by  prescription from the prior of saint Andrew of Rochester which priory be  dissolve the h h their possession be commit by the king to the dean and  chapter of Rochest Anderson the annuity do not remain for a annuity charge the  party and not the possession and therefore when the corporation be dissolve  which be the person the annuity be go walmesley but in h it be say there if a  priory be charge with a annuity the annuity shall continue although it be  charge to a abbey Anderson that be true for there the corporation be change  only but here it be dissolve William but that be save by the h for annuity be  express in the save Anderson but this be a annuity or rend with which the land  be charge Beaumond if it be anything wherewith the land be charge it be save  but the person be only charge with this annuity Walmsley but the h be that a  annuity out of a parsonage be not a mere personal charge but charge the parson  only in respect of the land and the court will consider on the case Owen pasch  Elizabeth in b r
bishop OF saint David versus Lucy pasch W see SC I ld raym with note Carthew  this be the case of dr Watson bishop of saint David who be convene before the  archbishop of Canterbury at Lambeth to answer diverse article exhibit against  he by which he be charge with simony in his office of bishop for take money  for curacy and admit person into order and for corrupt institution c and now  it be move for a prohibition and object that the archbishop have no power to  convene before himself any suffragan for a misdemeanour holt c j the sell of a  curacy and take money to admit man into order be simony and punishable by the  metropolitan and after many debate a prohibition be deny afterward they  proceed at Lambeth against the bishop upon the article and there a sentence of  deprivation pass against he from which he appeal and that sentence be affirm  by the delegate holt KB slander at nisi prius in person holt mich I I W case W  a action of slander in which the plaintiff set out that he be a pawnbroker by  trade and that the defendant say these word of he thou art a break fellow and  lie and prove loss of customer videlicet that some who be come to pawn good  with he forbear come and other take away they by occasion of the word holt c j  the trade of a pawnbroker be a honest lawful trade though it lie under  suspicion for it be lawful to buy old good and sell they again and so to lend  out money upon a pledge but a broker ought to be very cautious in buy steal  good yet if he shall buy steal good not know they to be such it be no crime  and upon point arise upon this case he say one may take a warrant to fear a  suspicious house upon a felony commit but it be at his peril to execute it in  due time and at suspect house only
bishop OF winchester vers wright debt do not lie for rend reserve upon a  freehold lease during the continuance of the lease in debt for rend upon a  demise of a fishery to the defendant for three life the plaintiff in his  declaration set out the demise army pron  interrog  the lessee enter et to be  et thus far be ind possessionatus the defendant plead nil debet and there be a  verdict for the Lord Raymond plaintiff and sergeant Pratt move in arrest of  judgement that it appear upon the declaration that the estate for three life  be continue and therefore debt do not lie it be a rend issue out of a freehold  sergeant Hooper in answer say that this be well enough after a verdict for  that nil debet put all the matter in issue and if the estate have not be  determine the plaintiff can not have have a verdict and that that matter  indeed be the great matter litigate at the trial and therefore the continue  not appear direct the court will take the estate to be determine Pratt say  that the averment in the declaration of the to be et thus far c be a express  averment that the estate do continue but if it be only indifferent it will not  be good for the plaintiff ought to show express in his declaration that the  estate for three life be determine or else he be not entitle to bring his  action of debt within the statute of Henry which be agree by the court and the  judgement arrest
bishop OF Worcester case mich W B R post ejectment versus seven defendant and  all join in the common rule and the issue be right in the plearoll c but the  nisi prius roll be versus five only and after verdict pro quer this be amend  by add the other two defendant roll Abr style Mod comb Str Rep B R tempt hard  ejectment against seven defendant who enter into the common rule for confess  lease entry and ouster and plead to issue the plearoll be right so be the  venire distringa and the to swear falsely but the issue in the nisi prius roll  be between the plaintiff and five defendant only which be try and verdict pro  quer and a amendment be move for it be oppose because it be to alter the  verdict to subject the jury to a attaint to make another issue and to make two  defendant guilty who be not try but it be amend for nothing can be inquire of  but the title of the lessor and the issue depend on his title which be not  alter by this amendment and it must be consider that all seven enter into the  common rule and that the plearoll c be all right and this can be intend other  than the same issue and the amendment be only to rectify a plain mistake and  make that the issue which be apparent intend to be so
bishop sarum contra Nosworthy car foe arrear of rend this case be touch a rend  of pound per annum reserve on a lease of land make by John late bishop of exon  to the defendant and the plaintiff by his bill say the defendant never pay the  say rend to the plaintiff nor any part thereof during all the time he be  bishop of exon which be for six year whereby chancery report a great arrear be  incur and due to the plaintiff from the defendant for which the plaintiff seek  relief the defendant insist that he direct tender the say rend to the bishop  while he be bishop of exon but he refuse the same have a intention to impeach  the say defendant estate and now the plaintiff be translate to another see and  so he ought not in law or equity to demand the say arrear but ought to be  debar from receive the same by his refusal as aforesaid his lordship be clear  of opinion that by law the plaintiff can not recover the say arrear but how  far the plaintiff be relievable in equity be the question and his lordship  order precedent to be produce where there have be a just duty but no legal  remedy and order a case to be state it appear that the plaintiff while he be  bishop of exon will not accept the say rend his lordship with judge assist he  be clear of opinion that there be no ground in equity to give the plaintiff  any relief and dismiss the bill
bishop sarum v hind the plaintiff shall examine no witness before the  defendant have answer the defendant be never serve with process and yet the  plaintiff serve diverse witness with process to examine they but order that no  witness shall be examine until the defendant be call in by process and have  answer accord to the ordinary course of the court bishop Sarum plaintiff hind  hind defendant year Elizabeth
bishop uvaltham against FARRAM justice make a order to remove one Sweetapple  to b inhabitant of b appeal to the quartersession there the order be set aside  then by order of two other justice he be send again to b which be confirm at  session but quash here for after the order for send he to b be quash they can  send he there by a new order the same term
bishop uvaltham against FARRAM Mr solicitor general show cause why the order  shall not be quash because it do not appear that the first order be quash upon  the merit of the cause or for want of form and then they may make a new order  if it be upon the merit the justice shall have say so in their order the court  hold that the justice at session have no power but to quash or affirm without  give any reason that it shall be suppose to have be upon the merit of the  cause unless the contrary appear but this second order be make six month after  the first be quash the person may have gain a settlement in f since that order  be quash N B to see we or do believe to be true be hold a good adjudication  the same term
bishop v Jessop attorney present in court enjoin not to proceed at commonlaw  burn a attorney at commonlaw for the defendant be present in court be enjoin  in open court upon pain of two hundred pound not to proceed at commonlaw upon  a action of debt upon a obligation against the plaintiff bishop plaintiff  Jessop and wats defendant year Elizabeth
bishop v lloyd all Oct Writ of privilege grant to the deputy of the usher of  the custom but deny to the chief accountant to the commissioner for victual  the navy one Martin who be deputy to Mr tailor usher of the custom be choose  headborough for west ham in the county of Essex move for a writ of privilege  to discharge he from that office which be grant at the side bar ut credo the  that of July upon the authority of which precedent I this day move for a writ  of privilege for the plaintiff who be chief accountant to the commissioner for  victual the Davy and choose churchwarden of the parish of saint Botolph  Aldgate London his attendance on the king business and the revenue of the  crown be equal concern as in the other case but the court think this not like  the other case for it do not appear here that there be a clause of exemption  in the patent constitute the commissioner of victual as in the other case  there be for all officer c and the true reason they go upon in the other case  be for that all officer of the custom be bind to a attendance in this court  which in this case the party apply for this writ of privilege be not
bishop vers city at guildhall a acceptance to pay at a goldsmith must be  tender within the same time that a note must case by endorsee of a bill of  exchange against defendant as acceptor who on tender of the bill write  messieurs Caswall and mount pay this bill when due for Thomas city the bill  fall due January the banker pay till the that at two and saint January the  money be demand of defendant for the defendant it be insist that the plaintiff  have give such a credit to the banker as to make it his loss and they compare  it to the common case of a note or draft keep for the plaintiff it be say that  there be no limit time but that of the statute of limitation to sue the  acceptor and that the plaintiff can come in as a creditor of the goldsmith  because they have do nothing to make themselves liable the chief justice hold  that it be the loss of the plaintiff who though he may have refuse to take  such a acceptance yet have now agree to it and it be to all purpose in the  nature of a draft which be always consider as actual payment when a reasonable  time to receive it in be elapse smith v de la fountain b r t Geo Bayley on  bill append No vide contra strange michaelmas term george king in b r sir  William lee Knt chief justice sir William chapel Knt Martin wright Esq Thomas  denison Esq justice sir Dudley rider Knt attorneygeneral the Hon William  Murray solicitor general
bishop vers stacy amendment after special demurrer barn b r Kely SC but not S  p after a special demurrer and joinder and argument the plaintiff have leave  to amend by the bill upon the file and this be grant upon debate vide Robinson  v baley burr and king v bet ante amendment of a plea after demurrer upon the  crown side
bisse against will error be assign for that the venire fac in the common bench  be book of man quorum who to have quatuor balance where the new statute be  quatuor libras for it be say that balance be a pound weight but because it be  a general case the justice will view how the parliament roll be and it be find  to be libras and then it be move again and Popham say that the inbent of the  statute be only to have sufficient juror gaudy agree to that and the statute  Noy er p be to be expound as the usage have be ever after the make of it and  the form of the writ be not upon any demand upon title Fenner agree the  statute de mercatoribus that the manner of the recognizance shall be of money  starling but it be sufficient if it be lawful money to which Clench agree for  it be say that if that shall be reverse a thousand judgement in the common  bench will be reverse upon the same point roll and how arrest a man upon a  latitat and there be a obligation make to the sheriff with a condition to make  a appearance and the question be if it be good for he may make his appearance  by his attorney yet Clench and Fenner the other send away think it to be good  for the law intend that he be in person when he be in custodian marescall and  kempe say it be adjudge where Mr Sackford baily of the liberty of saint Andrew  take a obligation in his own name for a personal appearance upon a latitat at  another day Doderidge move that the bind be void for the statute be Noy  general that be shall take a bind for his appearance and the sheriff have not  take a bind for his personal appearance and he may answer to the action by his  attorney but that he ought to be always in custodian marescall which be intend  in proper person and ought to be put in bail which be good enough and it be  rule that judgement shall be enter for the plaintiff unless better cause be  show within four day and so it be adjudge Elizabeth rot in Banstons the  sheriff of Sussex
bisse and tiler case in a action of trover and conversion of good the  defendant say that I S be possess of thesaid good and sell they unto he in  open market QuCere whether it he a good plea because it do amount to the  general issue of not guilty curian avisare vult and v Tompsons case James in  the lCings bench it be adjudge that it be no good plea hill James in the  common plead
bisse versus Harcourt Pas W m B R Intr hill ult rot wrong prayer of judgement  in replication make discontinuance Mod S C show Carth vide pa raze Entr b    Ent Indebitatus assumpsit the defendant plead a attainder of high treason in  disability the plaintiff reply a pardon prout per exemplification ind c which  be hold good et per judgment financial loss svan to which it be demurrer and  hold that there be a discontinuance by the misconclusion of the replication  for a ill prayer of judgement be as none this case be cite in bonner v hall ld  raym
BITTLE against wood TR car rot record in a action sur case on promise the  defendant plead the stat of limitation and that non assumpsit infra aged the  plaintiff reply that such a day he take out a writ of latitat and so continue  it down by a sheriff non to cause to go breve and do not conclude prout to  stand open per record for which cause the defendant demurrer but per curian  and the clerk this be needless the latitat roll be only for the private use of  the court and no record
BLACHHOUSE against more S c Danvers t trover de other utensilils lev stram  trover for several good in particular other utensilils England implement after  verdict and entire damage judgement be stay for other utensilils quot tantus  well qualia be uncertain
BLACHLEV versus fry trespass if the title be in question full cost so if any  thing carry away trespass for break his close and cut and carry away his corn  the defendant be find guilty of break the close and cut the corn only and the  question be whether the plaintiff shall have full cost gold urge the great  mischief if a man may come and cut down all one fruit tree c and not pay cost  Ven in sergeant Stroud S case a man come into his close Comberbach and dig d a  turf claim title Stroud bring trespass and at the trial the defendant do not  appear yet the judge certify d the title to be in question holt Ch I that may  be if it appear upon evidence and if the title be in question then full cost  though never so small damage or if any thing be carry away then full cost  because trespass lie at commonlaw for take the thing away as chattel but here  I know not how to help you we must keep to the law gold cite one gardener S  case about four year ago in this court in trespass for break and enter the  plaintiff house and break his window the defendant be find guilty of break the  window only and the plaintiff have full cost for the court say the statute  extend only to involuntary trespass but holt say he do not see that the  statute warrant any such distinction nor do he remember any such case  Adjournatur
BLACHLY versus fry mich will B R comens S c by the name of lutely v fry Mod  full cost in trespass vent raym Jon Mod Mod lev comb S C skin Doug in trespass  quare enclosed space to break in pieces and for cut his corn and carry it away  the jury find the defendant guilty of all but the carry away and gold move for  full cost on the car cap holt c j where the trespass be do clamand litulum or  the title may come in question there shall be full cost in strouds case for  enter his close and dig turf full cost be allow but the judge of assize  videlicet yorth c j certify that the freehold come in question so in judge  Eyre case in a action on the case for stop his way Adjournat vide ray keb Ven  keb Salkeld er p
BLACIKDEN against harvey Trin banc sup h rot demurrer upon a plea after  imparlance Blackden bring a action UPOD the case upon a indebitatus assumpsit  to pay unto he upon delivery of certain cloth against harvey as executor of I  S the defendant appear and imparle and after imparlance plead in abatement of  the writ that I S make other executor style report together with the defendant  who ought to have be name in the writ the plaintiff demurrer and for cause  show that the plaintiff do not show what good the defendant administer nor at  what time he administer any as he ought and James Edward and Foyes case be  cite to prove it a second cause of the demurrer be that the plea in abatement  of the writ be after imparlance which be not good because it be touch a thing  in the defendant knowledge and so he may have plead it before imparlance as it  be h f lerman justice absent roll answer that the first exception be not  material but he hold that the second be a good exception and that the  defendant can plead in abatement after imparlance for by his imparlance he  have admit the writ good therefore plead in chief if cause be not show to the  contrary on Friday next
black against allen m Elizabeth b be oblige in one hundred pound to a for the  honest of his son a apprentice with a and a in the obligation race out scales  and put in narcis Noy er p that be not forgery punishable for it be not a  prejudice to any but himself for by that the obligation be void and have lose  his own duty and so decree and the Lord keeper and the two Noy chief justice  say that if the defendant plead not guilty he shall not have the benefit of  the general pardon at hear but he ought to plead that and show that he be not  a party except in that but he needs not show that the offence be except for  the judge ex duty ought to take notice of the offence except but not of the  person
black and girl to know facias against tertenants several tertenants in several  county to know facias against the tertenants in one county only one tertenant  in another county die and this assign for error roll cro palm roll judgement  that this erroneous and hold b that the court in this case that one may be  summon by a rend liable to the judgement and the summons to be upon the land  Comberbach er p
black and HUTCHENSON how far the court will set aside a judgement  notwithstanding the length of time in debt on a judgement of sixteen year  stand Mr prime move to set the judgement aside for its be enter up of a term  precedent to that whereof the writ be take out whereon the defendant be arrest  the latitat bear testae hill and the judgement be enter up on the mich term  before accord the court order this matter to be refer to the master and upon a  affidavit of notice of the motion proceed be stay in the mean time
black and what shall not be say to be a void writ sergeant girdler move to  stay proceed which be carry on upon the late Act of parliament which allow  service of a copy of a writ to be good service upon account of the copy of the  writ as well as the writ itself be void there be the material word leave out  si invention sit in balliua tua the court say they do not think this will make  they void so refuse the motion
black contra the eastindia company penalty eastindia company Trade the company  employ black as their chief agent in India and by indenture they take a  covenant of he that he shall not trade for himself nor any other in saltpeter  pepper and diverse other commodity and black covenant to pay several rate for  every pound of saltpeter so trade in contrary to the covenant d and so of  diverse other rate for several other commodity which sum be some four some  five and some seven time the value of the commodity black buy the commodity  for himself in India to his own use the company bring debt for pound to which  sum the penalty amount against black who bring a bill to be relieve against  the penalty and notwithstanding that be prove that it be for the benefit of  the company that he so trade for he buy none but what he sell to they at a  just and market price and that if he have not provide such good the company  can not have be supply and their ship will have return short and what he buy  be with his own money when he have no effect of the company case in chancery  er p and although he have give notice of the want to the company and he deal  with poor artificer who case in chancery can not stay but must have advance  beforehand or else they will not work at all but most probable will have be  deal with by the Dutch to the loss of the company and it be prove by the  defendant own witness that such deal be necessary for the supply and benefit  of the company and that the former agent for the company and the agent for the  Dutch use so to do yet my Lord keeper dismiss the bill though it be object  that this covenant be a great penalty than a bind of double the value so it be  but a artificial divide of a penalty of a bind Lord keeper a lease be make  render rend and if a meadow be blow to pay pound rend per acre be this  relievable I see not how the company can subsist unless such Trade be restrain  dismiss the bill
black v bird upon the son confession the father be serve with a Subpoma  attachment grant Thomas Llood make oath the defendant son confess his father  be serve with a Subpna who have not appear therefore a attachment be grant  black plain bird Def a Elizabeth
black v black equity case abridge er by Act of parliament in Ireland land  lease to a papist at less than two three improve value and for any term above  thirtyone year be forfeit to the discoverer may cusack and Buckley mark Latin  and march mark Eyre and Burk Jan black and black vin Abr pl a conviction be  not necessary to prevent the devise of land by a papist in Ireland vide Str  andr
black versus John and james vander bergh in a information for not pay custom  for some linen cloth the case be thus videlicet the defendant be bear within  the realm their father be a alien but their mother bear here and the question  be whether the defendant be so bear as aforesaid shall pay alien custom or not  because the attorneygeneral say that direction be late give in Scaccario that  the issue of alien for the first generation be merchant shall pay alien duty  but here the defendant mother be English Hardres and the court give liberty to  find this special but the plaintiff will not insist upon it because some part  of the good be clear forfeit for not pay any custom at all or make offer to  pay it save only by a post entry after seizure and a month lack three day  after the first entry of the quantity and parcel at the customhouse and a  verdict pass for the plaintiff for that part only
black versus mole replevin attornment Danv Abr p lev keb a copyholder make a  lease for year render rend and then surrender two part of the reversion and he  to who use the surrender be make distrain for the two part of the rend and  mention not any attornment of the tenant in his avowry nor any notice and upon  this avowry the plaintiff demurrer and adjudge that attornment and notice be  not necessary because the surrender be a thing notorious of it self
black versus west and trench every material allegation upon plead which be not  answer be admit replevin of two cow the captain be lie to be in a place call  Downfield the defendant avow for that that the place where c contain two acre  call MarshAcre in Downfield and two acre call Stretfield in Downfield and that  he be seize of they in fee and take the cow videlicet one in MarshAcre and the  other in Stretfield damage pheasant c the plaintiff plead in bar that the  defendant take the two cow in Downfield and traverse the take in Marshacre and  Stretfield in Downfield and issue thereupon and verdict for the avowant and  now Mr Carthew move in arrest of judgement that the issue be immaterial  because the plaintiff have traverse the take in the two place which he  understand to be a plea of prisel in auter lieu but have not take any notice  of the damage pheasant so that though a verdict be or the avowant yet he have  no title to have return Lord Raymond er p because the damage pheasant be not  find c say non allocatur for that be admit by the issue of the take videlicet  if they be take there that they be take there damage pheasant
blackall against gold trinity geo move to stay proceed because no attorney  name be set to the writ deny Warnell against revel and Fawks against jay Trin  Perkin against baker hill Geo
blackamoor versus mercer before sand sand keb in a judgement against a  executor a become facias issue out to the sheriff with a to know become  inquiry and a devastavit be find accord to the common course the return  whereof be quod to visit good who to be testator c to have who to remove in  use suum proprium to turn round it be object against this return that it be  not say devastavit for in some case a executor may just convert the good to  his own use hale say ancient when the sheriff return a devastavit which be not  find by any inquisition and to which there be no answer it be necessary to  insert the word devastavit but otherwise in a return upon this special writ  for if the case be that be have not waste the good but only eloigned they so  as the sheriff can come at they the executor be Chargeable upon this writ de  good not common with others and this return answer the writ
BLACKBORN and grieve modern pl Wednesday Jan copyhold special verdict find the  land copyhold surrender by I S to the use of a for year the remainder to b and  his heir b die and whether his heir shall pay a fine be doubtful on a special  conclusion that if admittance of lessee be admittance of he in remainder then  for the defendant hale Ch just baker and Denhams case style pl if any  copyholder die seize his land shall go to the young beneficiary and use die  before admittance and whether this shall go as at commonlaw or by custom be  the question and adjudge it go accord to custom and this be a admittance of he  in remainder to all intent and purpose except as to the lord fine which if by  custom be Payable by the tenant for year for himself only his admittance avail  not he in remainder contra if the fine be pay by the lessee for all estate  also this be trover by one tenant in common which on not guilty be void  against the other and must be plead in abatement but in trover by one tenant  in common against a stranger he may recover his part contra in detinue which  recover the thing entire say adjornatur Keble er p
BLACKBORN who tam and daniel vide ante S c Mr reeves now move on the part of  hall who be complain of before and he say he do not act any thing for the  plaintiff after the defendant employ he and as to his not take due care of the  cause he say the defendant first employ one Collins who die and then when hall  begin to be employ he writ to collins agent to inquire about the state of the  cause and he send he word that the defendant have plead and when the  prosecutor shall proceed any far in the cause he will send he word of it upon  which the court say that they think this a sufficient excuse to clear he of a  attachment
Blackborough versus davies pasch W salk Administration be grant to the  grandmother the aunt move for a mandamus to have it grant to hard which be  deny and now she move for a mandamus to have a distribution be in equal degree  but it be insist on by the other side that she be not entitle holt KB to it be  not so near as the grandmother for the grandmother stand in the place of the  mother and be in the second degree to the intestate the ant be the daughter of  the grandmother and daughter can be in equal degree with their mother before  stat James cap if a man die without wife or child his mother have all and his  brother and sister nothing that Act be make that the mother may not carry all  away to another husband the father survive have all at this day per holt c j  there ought to be no mandamus in this case by the commonlaw before and at the  Conquest the child both male and female inherit alike and the estate whether  real or personal descend to all equal in the reign of king Henry female begin  to be exclude as to the real estate and the male inherit equal the socage land  about this time or in the reign of Henry the father and mother be exclude from  the real estate of their child but not as to the personal and as by the  commonlaw the father and mother be near than brother and sister so the  grandfather and grandmother be near than uncle and aunt and the grandmother in  this case be the root of the kindred whereas the aunt be only the branch
Blackborough versus davis Pas will B R ld raym comens p wms Mod S c see S C ld  raym with note post Administration grant to the grandmother and mandamus pray  to the spiritual court to grant it to the aunt and deny holt Administration  Salkeld er p void when grant by a wrong ordinary and voidable when grant to a  wrong person   b cro et more ecclesiastical court may grant administration to  which they will of kindred in equal degree lev Administration be grant to the  grandmother the aunt move for a mandamus to have it grant to her urge that the  first administration be void she be near in degree and that there need no  repeal this administration be grant to a wrong person in which case the very  grant of a new administration amount to a repeal and Owen cro et side holt c j  contra saint it be not void as where administration be grant in a wrong  diocese but only voidable for at that rate trover will lie against the first  administrator and there will be a nullity in all mean act if administration be  commit to a creditor and after repeal at the suit of the next akin he shall  retain against the rightful administrator and his disposal of the good even  pen the citation till sentence of repeal stand good dly if in equal degree the  spiritual court have election and the grandmother be as near as the aunt  because the descent to either will be a mediate descent the mediation of which  be the father mediant patre it be enough at law to say frater hres or sister  hres but the court think the advantage on the grandmother side in this respect  that she stand in linea rectan dly this be a matter contestable in the  spiritual court whereto she ought to apply herself and it do not appear she  have ergo the mandamus deny Salkeld after this the aunt come and move for a  mandamus to oblige the ecclesiastical court to cause a distribution and that  be deny vide title distribution
blackbourn vers Mathias practice as to a setoff the defendant plead the  general issue but forget to give notice at the same time of a setoff and upon  motion in time the court give leave to withdraw the plea in order to deliver  the same plea again with a proper notice to set off and say it have be do so  before strange pro def vide post as to bring money into court on the same  reason vide Giddings v Giddings say Rep tailor v Joddrell b r will by if the  plea to be plead exclude the merit as the statute of limitation Cox v bowl  will see Thornton who tam v Gibson will strange report er p
BLACKBURNS case debt hob a devise to a feme till her daughter come to such a  age be a term and go to her survive husband norf a action of debt be bring by  I S against Blackburne upon a lease for a year and so from year to year and  upon nil debet plead the jury give a special verdict to this effect well seize  of land in fee devise they to his daughter and her heir when she come to the  age of eighteen year and that his wife shall take the profit of the land to  her use without any account to be make until the daughter come to the age of  eighteen year and make his wife his executor and die and it be provide that  the wife shall pay the old rend and find the daughter at school until she can  read and write English the feme enter and prove the will take husband and die  the husband assign this term to the lessor who bring this action and it be  find that all the condition be perform and that the daughter be within the say  age of eighteen videlicet thirteen year and the sole question be whether it be  a term for year in the wife and whether when she take husband he shall have it  after the death of wife and it be rule clear that it be and it be by will it  be a good lease another question be if this trust of education be quasi a  limitation Hutton personal and with intent that the lease shall not be to the  wife any long then she may educate her daughter and it be agree that it be not  for any one may educate her and find her at school and there it be without any  default in the wife for it be the act of God and therefore judgement for the  plaintiff trin James
BLACKELOR and cross attorney bill though not sign evidence for his executor as  well as for himself case for the executrix of a attorney for fee and  solicitation the plaintiff give in evidence a bill make by the testator in his  lifetime sergeant wright pro to ward off object that it be not sign by he  neither can it have be give in evidence for he in his life and therefore shall  not be evidence for his executrix but holt say that the book of a man that  make regular entry may be evidence for he and perhaps several of these thing  can not in their nature be prove by record the bill be examine by a attorney  in court and report reasonable the testator S hand to the bill be not  necessary Comberbach er p
blacket and lumley Friday Jan error error of judgement in hexam in replevin  the defendant avow damage pheasant the plaintiff claim common to a house under  blacket the defendant traverse that blacket and all those who estate he have  have have common and verdict for the defendant and venire fa be of fallowfield  h c and therefore praercept be not say ad curian nor ad tunc ibidem per  seneschallum quod venire facias ad the same curian the same day and Northey  and brown be reverse for that error per curian its well be ad the same curian  the same day its because nec c for who nec c which per curian be ill and for  this error judgement be reverse its hard but the locus in quo be not infra c  judgement be reverse
blacket and lumley Wednesday January common in replevin in a the defendant  avow for damage pheasant the plaintiff by replication claim common to a  message in Fallofield not say infra jurisdict curiae venire facias on traverse  of common be of a and f infra jurisd which by hale chief justice be ill and  error though if the defendant plead a plea without place the plaintiff may for  his expedition take issue and allege a place but though he do not this be out  of jurisdiction and so void but by wile this be well enough be of one of the  place from which it shall come Twisden agree with hale because a inferior  court can inquire dehors as in the case of hull bridge also the venire facias  be because nec for who nec which by Twisden be error as Edward war case of  Canterbury to know for to know facias but wile hold this well enough hale  chief justice doubt but wile hold the venire facias teaching be per  seneschallum not say per curian be ill but hale and Twisden on the contrary be  ad ean Keble they curian but each hold one error judgement reverse nisi
blacket versus lumley error I vent keb a writ of error to reverse a judgement  give in the court of the royal manor of Hexham in Northumberland in a replevin  the defendant avow for damagefeasant the plaintiff plead in bar to the avowry  that Fenwick be seize in fee of the manor of Fallowfield and that he and all  those who estate c have use time out of mind to have common of pasture in loco  in quo c for all his farmer and copyholder and that he be a copyholder and  hold of the say manor and justify for common belong Raymond sir t thereunto  the avowant reply and traverse the prescription and it be find against he and  judgement for the plaintiff and now the error assign be the venire facias be  ill award for that it be prceptum be per seneschallum car prd quod when fac  dvodecim tam de vicineto de hexam how de vicineto manor de Fallowfield infra  jurisdiction c because nec c quod to be hic ad horan sencundam post noon what  a day it be not per cur nor per seneschallum in cur and it may be it be out of  court and process in private jurisdiction shall not be take by intendment and  of this opinion be Twisden and wile but hale chief justice contra because it  be return the same day and the court shall be presume to be continue the whole  day the manor of Fallowfield be not lie to be within the jurisdiction as it  ought to be in the plead of the prescription and the say in the award of he  venire facias that it be so be not sufficient and to this opinion hale agree  the because nec for who nee be not good but they ought to have put it at large  and not as it be in b r and because nec be nonsense and Twisden and wile allow  this exception but hale chief justice do not but upon the consideration of all  the exception judgement be reverse and so pronounce Raymond sir t er p
Blackford and hudson by what it be that the court direct that the nisi prius  roll shall be amend in a action of trover the plaintiff have describe the  parcel of good in the nisi prius roll different from what he have in the copy  of the issue upon which the plaintiff have obtain a rule to show cause why the  nisi prius roll shall not be amend by the copy of the issue sergeant eyres now  show for cause that the plaintiff must have something by he which he make the  copy of the issue from and therefore there be no occasion that he shall have  this assistance from the defendant however the court chief justice absent make  the rule absolute
Blackford versus Althiln Trin James rotulo a action of trespass bring  wherefore by force and arm a certain horse of the say plaintiff take away c  the defendant convey to himself a certain annuity grant to he by one Brownlow  goldsborough er p John hit the plaintiff show that one William hit father of  the say John hit the grantor be seize of land in fee which land be gavelkind  land and devise it to his wife for life the remainder to John hit the elder  and John hit the young his son and the heir of their body and afterward  William die and the woman enter and be seize for life and the two son enter  and be seize in tail and be so seize John hit the young have issue John hit c  and traverse without this that John hit the father at the time of grant the  annuity be seize of the tenement aforesaid with the appurtenance in his  demesne as of fee as c and the defendant as before say that the say John hit  the father at the time of the grant the annuity aforesaid be seize and after  the trial it be move in arrest of judgement suppose it be misbied because the  issue be that the say John hit the father at the time of the grant c and it do  not appear that the say John hit be nominate father neither can it appear that  the say John hit be the father and so the word father be idle and the court be  of opinion that it be help by the statute of Jeofails and the word father be  idle and judgement be give for the plaintiff a bring a action of battery  against the husband and wife and two other the wife and one of the other  without the husband Brownlow goldsborough pleadsnot guilty and the husband and  the other plead seu assault dernesn and try and allege in arrest of judgement  because the woman plead without the husband and the judgement be stay and a  repleader allege and this case be confirm by a case which be between youngs  and Bartram
Blackhall against gold trin pound geo two prac ring barn S c motion to set  aside process the attorney name not be put to it Vid Morley v Johnson post p a  motion to stay proceed because the attorney name be not put to the copy of the  process serve upon the defendant as the Act of Geo two cap S for the better  regulation of atorneys and solicitor require the court deny the motion because  it do not concern the party so as to make the process void but only the  attorney who sue it out who may be censure for not pursue the direction of the  Act
Blackhall versus crying Euhan mich george b battery lie to be do on a day not  yet come in assault and battery upon not guilty plead the plaintiff have a  verdict it be object in arrest of judgement that the battery be lie to be  commit on a day not come when the verdict be give but this objection be  disallow because it be impossible it shall be commit after the verdict be give  it be as if no time at all have be lie in the declaration for a impossible  time be no time and in such case it can never be intend that the jury give  damage for a battery which be not then do it be true if the plaintiff have lie  a time after the action and before the verdict the damage must be intend to be  give for the battery then do that be at the time of the action bring but that  ought not to be because at that time the plaintiff have no cause of action b  this seem evident to be the same case which be report salk by the name of  Acton v eel m wm for that case in comens be entitle Blackhall v heal lev hob S  p cro Elizabeth ad raym
Blackhams case hill Ann in person holt c j at nisi prius in Middlesex discuss  bar v Jackson Ph Spencer v William l r p d sentence of the spiritual court in  a cause within their jurisdiction be conclusive evidence in the point try  otherwise of a collateral matter Wilson Mod bro p c hark law tract hark saint  Tr vol p bull n p Str Rep B R tempt Hara in trover upon evidence at a trial  before holt c j at the sit in Middlesex the case be the plaintiff prove the  good to be in his possession and to be take away by the defendant the  defendant show that these be the good of jane Blackham in her lifetime and  that the defendant have take out letter of administration to her and so be  entitle to the good upon this the plaintiff prove that some few day before her  death she be actual marry to he and in answer to that it be insist that the  spiritual court have determine the right to be in the Salkeld er p defendant  for they can not have grant administration to the defendant but upon suppose  there be no such marriage and that this sentence be of a matter within their  jurisdiction be conclusive and can not be gainsay in evidence et per holt c j  a matter which have be direct determine by their sentence can be gainsay a  their sentence be conclusive in such case Salkeld and no evidence shall be  admit to prove the contrary but that be to be intend only in the point direct  try otherwise it be if a collateral matter be collect or infer from their  sentence as in this case because the administration be grant to the defendant  therefore they infer that the plaintiff be not the intestate husband as he can  not have be take to be if the point there try have be marry or unmarried and  their sentence have be not marry a r send for bro p c vide bro par can
BLACKHAMS case hill Ann lSalk in trover before holt c j the plaintiff prove  the good to be in his possession and to be take away by the defendant the  defendant show that these be the good of jane Blackham in her lifetime and  that the defendant have take out letter of administration to her and so be  entitle to the good upon this the plaintiff prove that some few day before her  death she be actual marry to he and in answer to that it be insist that the  spiritual court have determine the right to be in the defendant for they can  not have grant administration to the defendant but upon suppose there be no  such marriage and that this sentence be of a matter within their jurisdiction  be conclusive and can not be gainsay in evidence et per holt c j a matter  which have be direct determine by their sentence can be gainsay in the point  direct try it be otherwise if a collateral matter be collect or infer from  their sentence as in this case holt KB er p
blacklock v barn Nov if mortagee let we the estate that shall be always  suppose the value unless he show otherwise if the mortgagor make proof that  the estate be let at such a price while in the hand of the mortgagee they  shall be deem the rate at which it be let the whole time unless he show the  contrary which be in his power as be let by he
Blackman versus Cobbet mich W m in c b rot reverse Trin W m in b r action on  two promise and entire damage when one of the promise be void I lev show comb  post Danv pl Writ of error on a judgement in c b on a action on the case upon  two several promise by Cobbet the plaintiff in the original action against  Blackman as administrator to t S the defendant plead plene to manage and a  verdict be find against he and now it be assign for error that entire damage  be give upon the two promise whereof one be void for that it be lie as follow  Carthew er p Carthew sacred scripture in consideration that the the plaintiff  have sell a mare to the intestate be promise to pa that the plaintiff of such  size containing ten each top tantus horse prediction reasonably to have to  deserve and then aver in fact quod horse paedicta reasonably to have to  deserve which be absurd to say that the mare deserve to have so much money and  therefore this promise be void and the court be of this opinion wherefore the  judgement be reverse
BLACKMANS case it be assign for error that the venire be to summon Probus  regales man instead of book and so a material variance and allege that many  judgement have be reverse for it but the court here be inform that the  precedent be general Probus nstead of book will not allow the exception
Blackmore against smith mich geo after plea plead proceed have stay three year  and then plaintiff deliver a issue and afterward give fourteen day notice of  trial the court make the rule absolute to set aside the verdict for want of a  term notice of his intent to proceed by the party proceed pursuant to general  rule easter Geo birch for plaintiff agar for defendant barn er p
Blackmore versus TIDDERLY hill Ann B R ld raym S c S C Mod Rep a Q Mod not  guilty within six year be ill in trespass vide ante pl Mod Faresl in trespass  for assault and battery the defendant plead non culp infra sex aged by mistake  and not accord to Salkeld the statute which be but four year the plaintiff  demurrer and after argument it be adjudge a ill plea for if it be consider as  at commonlaw there be no such plea if on the statute the act be not pursue and  the plaintiff can not take issue on it quod be culp infra sex aged be a issue  immaterial because it may be the jury may find he not guilty infra quatuor  aged but guilty infra sex aged judgement for the plaintiff
Blackston and heap case in a action of debt for rend the case be this a man  possess of a term for year in the right of his wife make a lease for year  render rend to he his executor and assign and die the question be whether the  executor or the wife shall have the rend Haughton and crook justice against  Montague chief justice Doddridg be absent that the rend be go but it be agree  by they all that the executor of the husband shall not have it but Montague  hold that the wife shall have it but it be agree that if lessee for year make  a lease for io year and afterward surrender h his term that the rend be go and  yet the term for year continue and in the principal case if the husband after  the lease make have grant over the reversion his grantee shall not have the  rend but Montague say that in that case the wife in chancery may he relieve  for the rend Godbolt mich James in the king bench
Blackston contra moreland march mortgage encumbrance notice porter have a  annuity charge on the manor of c moreland have a estate in the manor liable to  the annuity Blackston have a estate subsequent to both by way of mortgage  moreland have no notice of blackston interest treat with he in the reversion  in fee who desire to borrow money of he and thereupon he agree and purchase  porter interest and for that and money lend to the reversioner buy in porter  interest and pay pound part to porter part lend to the reversioner there be no  more than pound due to porter the question be whether between moreland and  Blackston who now exhibit his bill to pay off porter and moreland their debt  he shall pay more than be due to porter more than pound and the mortgagemoney  due to moreland he be decree to pay the whole pound but otherwise if moreland  have notice of blackston encumbrance
Blackstone allen v heber a charge by will on a estate do not make the heir a  purchaser SC stram action of debt on the bind of the father to who the  defendant be heir plea riens per descent d the fact be that the father have  devise his land to the defendant charge with debt queen if this make he a  purchaser for plaintiff hold hob that it will not make the heir a purchaser  but if the tenure or quality of the estate be alter it have be otherwise dyer  Styl Hedger and row lie a devise to heir ex part of a mother of no effect e  more cro Elizabeth Lutw salk f for defendant be cite cro car g Mod Biillam and  Charnock per tot cur if the tenure or quality of the estate be alter the heir  be a purchaser but a charge on the estate do not alter the manner of the heir  take the land a devise be void where it give the same as will be take by  descent I ld raym h judgement for the plaintiff d see Com dig pleader e Bac  Abr heir group of musical notes f p e as to the case in which a descent ex  part means shall be consider break so as to let in the heir ex part of a  father see Martin v Strachan I stram will will TR n a bro PC and ed Boe v  Baldwere TR do v Morgan TR hark   light b n r and Huisi v earl of Winchelsea  post burgess v wheat post see alsG Hutcheson v Hammond bro c c f clarke v  smith SC I Com r g gilpin can it appear by Mr ford note of allam v Heber  though this be not notice either in strange or blackstone report of that case  that the court deny gilpin case to be law per Bayley I m S h Emerson v  Inchbird S p chaplin v Leroux m S see also Langley v Sneyd Brod b smith v  trigg stram Scott v Scott I Eden where the case on this bead be refer to in Mr  Eden note do v Timins I b a Com dig dissent a as to equitable asset see Bailey  v ekins Ves junr Shiphard v lutwidge Ves junr and smith v Parker post
Blackstone easter Tmm geo ill king b williams v vaughan prohibition for try  the right of name a churchwarden in court Obristian motion for a prohibition  Vaughan claim to appoint a churchwarden by custom and institute a suit in  court Christian against William who be choose by the parish William move for a  prohibition Mr Pratt show for cause that the nature of the office be entire  spiritual raym king v Rees Carthew but per lee CJ churchwarden be consider as  temporal officer in several act of parliament a rule for a prohibition make  absolute a Dawson v foul Hardr godb burn Ecc law ed r v shepherd TR Bac Abr  churchwarden a vin Abr Ch ware b p and see r v dr Harris post Blackstone  trinity term geo ill king b
Blackstone fulke v Bourke in order to exonerate a bail except to his name must  be strike out of the hairpiece SC cite in burr Ashhurst move to stay proceed  on a to know facias against the bail for irregularity the fact be that cook  and maning become bail for the defendant at a judge chamber the cause bein g  remove by habeas corpus afterward the bail have except to cook and one sander  justify in court but mad do not justify yet his name be never strike out of  the bailpiece whereupon a to know facias issue against he barn Blackstone  Laforlune and Wilson be cite in support of the objection by the court it shall  have be part of the rule that man name shall be strike out of the bailpiece  and on motion it be accord so amend without cost and be so draw up no cause be  afterward show and the rule be make absolute upon payment of the plaintiff  cost hitherto incur c c S p Burgundy v leite burr gold v Holstrom east but  though bail be except to unless their name be strike out of the bailpiece they  still remain liable Waller v green say Bramwell v farmer taunt and see Jones v  tub will say as to bail in error
Blackstone Guichard v roberts defendant may set up a illegal consideration  against a action on a note of band action on a note of band on the trial the  defendant give in evidence that the note be obtain upon a smuggle  consideration f on which the jury find a verdict for he on a motion for a new  trial Lord Mansfield be strong of opinion that such evidence shall not have be  admit and take a difference where the plaintiff allege the turpis causan as  the ground of his action and where the defendant set it up as the ground of  his defence in both which case he deny that either party shall avail himself  of his own wrong and grant a rule to show cause but afterward in the close of  the term the cause be compromise Lord Mansfield take it up again mero movement  and declare that it be now the clear opinion of the whole court that on this  action a illegal consideration may clear be set Blackstone er p up as a  defence and they do not see why it may not be do on a action of debt on bind g  for every creditor ought in justice to prove the consideration on which his  contract be find and though the law allow bind and note to be prima fancy  evidence of a good consideration without prove it on the part of the plaintiff  yet it ought not to preclude the defendant from show that the consideration in  fact be a have one f see ante n wonder see lightfoot v tenant Bos p Robinson v  Bland ante pound n W Faikney v Beynous post and Bayley on bill ed
Blackstone heron v heron a judgement in common plea no issuable plea when  false in fact within the meaning of a rule for time defendant obtain a rule  for time to plead plead issuably rejoin gratis and take short notice of trial  afterward the defendant plead a judgement in the court of common plea upon  which the plaintiff sign judgement and now defendant move to set aside this  judgement for irregularity but it be prove by affidavit that the plea be in  fact a false plea the court hold that this be not a Blackstone er p issuable  plea within the meaning of the rule for time and therefore discharge the rule  for set aside the judgement with cost Q Q S p Lowfield v Jackson will cave v  Aaron will see also Hartley v Hodson b more
Blackstone ingle v Wadworth and another one of two defendant in replevin can  have his cost upon acquittal SC burr Sayers cost in replevin one defendant be  find guilty and the other acquit the question be whether the latter can have  his cost under the statute W c ll sect Lord Mansfield CJ the court upon the  principle of natural justice have a strong bias to entitle the defendant to  cost but the case be too full settle it be say that a replevin be a action of  trespass and as such be within the statute but the trespass mention in the  statute have always be construe to be trespass way et arms the case be too  strong to permit we at present to consider that statute with a latitude the  court have uniform construe it strict and therefore trover be never allow to  be within it the case of dibbins and cook stram be not full report there Lord  Hardwicke take it to be settle that the statute must be construe strict and  therefore though that be a action of trespass on the case be for a nuisance  yet not beffig a action of trespass way et arms it be hold not to be within  the statute this be a much strong case than the present for replevin be by no  mean any kind of trespass the statute Elizabeth c which create the court of  exchequer Chamber for error out of this court mention diverse action and among  other trespass but in r Rep it be hold that replevin be not a action of  trespass and therefore error in replevin will not lie in that court it be  observe in dibbins and cook that the word trespass in the statute of  limitation be hold to signify all action of trespass but that statute be  always construe liberal this statute strict rule for tax cost for the  defendant discharge m l pool v boullon barn m as to the cost in replevin see  vin ab cost c and Supp ib Bac Abr cost f pa g c S Tidds bring ed
Blackstone MEDHURST v wait highconstable by himself or deputy may billet  soldier mider the mutiny Act SC burr trespass for billet soldier by a deputy  highconstable verdict for defendant motion for new trial hold by the court  that a bighconstable be a officer within the Mutin Act for billet of soldier  and that he may occasional appoint deputy who act in their principal absence  will be good and therefore new trial deny web for the defendant cite Phelps  and Winchcomb more Bulst Ro Rep Ro Abr sir Walter pane case keb I side but  best in I lie also march hale PC hale PC
Blackstone miller gise No proceed can be pursue under a repeal Act of  parliament though begin before the repeal unless by special exception under  the insolvent debtor Act Geo oneMiller be compel by a creditor at the session  at Guildball to give up his effect and be accord sign and swear to his  schedule c but some circumstance arise the court adjourn his discharge till  the next session in the mean time the statute Geo pass which repeal the compel  clause motion for a mandamus to the justice now to proceed to grant miller his  discharge the jurisdiction have attach before the clause be repeal but by the  court nothing be more clear than that the jurisdiction be now go and that we  can grant any such mandamus Even offence commit against the clause while in  force can nt have be now punish without a special crause to allow it and  therefore a clause be insert in the repeal statute for that purpose b rule  discharge b a contract declare by a statute to be illegal be not make good by  a subsequent repeal of the statute Jaques v withy I h Bla and see m ig  parliament r I c
Blackstone the king v greenwood attorney strike off the roll may be readmit  greenwood be a attorney of this court and about two year ago be strike off the  roll for malpractice and be now upon bumble petitiODand motion readmit the  court declare that the strike off the roll be not to be understand as a  perpetual disability but be sometime only mean as a punishment and may be  consider in the light of a suspension only if the court see cause u u the like  be do by the court t t g king b Tidds bring ed but be can take any advantage  of his rivilege in any action then depend ex part coal I Doug n moody can barn  see also hill can post
Blackstone the king v heydon ante witness indict for perjury not a reason to  postpone judgement against the person convict SC burr the defendant be convict  at the assize for bribery and it be now move to postpone judgement till a  indictment which he have prefer against one Burbage for perjury in big  evidence be determine Norton solicitorgeneral and Morton show for cause that  this be a motion of the first impression and of very dangerous consequence  mere to delay justice that the perjury assign in the indictment be not in  respect of the fact for which Heydon be convict but a collateral circumstance  that Burbage offer to take big trial immediate after the indictment find but  the defendant refuse to consent to it that the witness on this indictment for  perjury be all examine one only except on the information for bribery Lord  Mansfield CJ I be clear that Heydon can be no witness in this case if they  mean by this indictment to alleviate the judgement of the court for the  bribery because be be swear in his own cause and the witness on the indictment  have all be previous examine at the former trial make a end of this motion for  their credit have already be weigh by a jury and find want therefore let the  defendant stand commit till Saturday April afterward the court give judgement  on he to be imprison three month and pay a fine of
Blackstone the king v peter annet judgement for blasphemy defendant be convict  on a information for write a most blasphemous libel in weekly paper call the  free enquirer to which he plead guilty in consideration of which and of his  poverty of his have confess his error in a affidavit and of his be seventy  year old and some symptom of wildness that appear on his inspection in court  the court declare they have mitigate their intend sentence to the follow  videlicet to be imprison in Newgate for a month to stand twice in the pillory  with a paper on his forehead inscribe blasphemy to be send to the house of  correction to hard labour for a year to pay a fine of S d and to find security  himself in and two surety in each for his good behaviour during life v v r v b  Carlisle b a
Blackstone the king v SPRAGGS when conviction be remove by certiorari no  motion can be in arrest of judgement unless the defendant be personal present  SC burr the defendant be convict on a indictment for a conspiracy sergeant  Davy move in arrest of judgement Mr gold object to the regularity of this  motion the defendant not be in court on the authority of stram sergeant Davy  endeavour to make a distinction between person convict of felony and other  misdemeanour and if the clerk in court will undertake for the defendant  appearance in the case of misdemeanour he argue that it be equal beneficial to  the public but the constant practice be that the defendant shall be personal  present whenever be move to arrest a judgement on a conviction remove by  certiorari because otherwise it may be a expense to the prosecutor afterward  to bring he up by habeas corpus the court refuse to hear the motion and direct  the sergeant now to move for a habeas corpus on behalf of the defendant to  bring he up the second day of next term which be grant g g see r v Gibson  stram r v Opie I sand so the court will not entertain a motion fora new trial  for a misdemeanour unless all the defendant be in court r v deal east r v  askew m S and see r v Gibson ante Blackstone easter term geo two king b
Blackstone yates v Carlisle et all vexatious plaintiff how censure SC ante  this cause go down to trial on the feign issue Carlisle be plaintiff and  Robinson defendant but the defendant Robinson make default at the assize and a  verdict be have against he and now upon motion and solemn argument the court  direct this verdict to be enter of record and all the cost incur in every  stage of proceed which amount it be say to near to be pay by Robinson
Blackwall v low a year value allow upon surrender of copyhold land it be  decree by assent that the defendant be lord of the manor of alderwasley shall  have for a fine of a copyholder upon a surrender one whole year value as the  same be reasonable worth accord to the usual rate of land in that country  Blackwall and Alice tenant of the manor of Alderswasly plaintiffs low  defendant year Elizabeth
BLACKWEL content Redman car foe fraud in gain c that the plaintiff be a linen  draper be by the defendant draw to play at dice at the house of the defendant  Aitel and that the defendant buller have win about pound of the  Plaintiff which be do by false dice bring thither by the defendant Redman the  defendant Redman do lend to the plaintiff several sum of money amount in all  to forty pound which the say buller likewise win from the plaintiff the  defendant Redman insist that he do dissuade the plaintiff from play after he  have lose the say pound and be unwilling to lend he any money yet the  plaintiff importune he who after that give a bill under his hand for the  payment thereof in a few day and chancery report yet afterward get the say  bill away from the defendant and that the same money lend to the plaintiff wag  money pay by the say buller unto the plaintiff for a debt due unto he from  buller yet it appear that the say several sum so lend to the plaintiff by the  defendant Redman be but the same money which the say buller have former so win  of the plaintiff and lend diverse time over by the say Redman for the say  buller and all get again by the say buller and it do not appear that the say  buller be real indebt to the chancery report er p say Redman in any sum nor  that he do ever recover or have satisfaction for the say pound from Redman  this court be of opinion that the say money be undue get from the plaintiff  who can have no remedy at law for the same against buller he be beyond sea and  this court decree a perpetual injunction against redmans proceed for the pound  and that the plaintiff shall be discharge from the say action for the pound  and of the say pound
Blackwell and ashton Trin car banc Reg demurrer to a to know facias upon a  judgement demurrer abatement four several person be bind conjuctim and  separately in a obligation to Blackwell Blackwell have a judgement against  they one of the defendant die Blackwell sue out a to know facias against the  and it be demurrer to the to know facias because one of the defendant against  who the judgement upon which the to know facias be grant be dead when the to  know facias issue forth in this case it be say if two be bind joint in a  obligation and a action be bring against one of they only upon this obligation  the defendant can demurrer but may plead in abatement of the writ and if two  be bind joint in a obligation and one of they die and the obligee bring a  action of debt against the other that survive he must in his declaration set  forth that the other be de d the plaintiff in the case at the bar perceive the  inclination of the court to be that the venire facias be not good move for his  own expedition to have it quash which be grant style report er p
Blackwell c against clerk admiral a prohibition be pray to the admiralty in  suit there for mariner wage which be not ordinary to be grant but because it  be find on specialty make on land and the custom of merchant that unless the  ship come home no wage be Payable to they and consequent not to their executor  or administrator and this plea be disallow in the admiralty and so its suggest  and therefore the court grant a prohibition notwithstanding sentence and  appeal it be contra to a verdict at law and not have on due proof but contrary  to the plea plead
Blackwell v Simpson upon the hear of the matter it appear that the land in  question have be in the defendant and their possession by who they claim by  the space of eighty year therefore order and decree the defendant to be  dismiss Blackwell plaintiff Simpson and other defendant year Elizabeth
Blackwell versus ashton hill car rot to know facias a to know facias be bring  against three bailees upon a recognizance acknowledge by they and the  principal joint and several and upon a demurrer the writ abate by good  advisement because this be find upon a record the pl ought to show forth the  cause of the variance from the record as that one be dead wait if a action be  bring upon bind in the like case there the defendant ought to show that it be  make by they and other in full life not name in the writ because the court  shall not intend that the bind be seal and deliver by all that be name in it  and therefore the defendant can demurrer upon it though it be enter in he word  and so it be if a action be bring upon a recognizance take before the mayor  and recorder c by the statute of h because there the party must seal and so  have it be adjudge dyer e h c h
blackwood vers the Southsea company it be no objection to proceed on error  that the return be not sign by the chief justice Cas temi hard SC Yelv Sark  upon error from c b it be object that the return be not sign by c I Eyre and  therefore it be move to stay the proceed the constant practice be for the  chief justice to set his hand under the answer on the back of the writ say per  curian at commonlaw it be not require that officer shall sign return and the  statute of York make it necessary only for sheriff and though this may be  matter of strange irregularity in c b we can take no notice of it but must  proceed upon the record which be endorse an answer roberti Eyre soldier  capital crime justice infranominati which for any thing we know to the  contrary may be the handwriting of the chief justice the writ require the  record to be send sub seal which be never practice the judgement be affirm
blackwood versus the south sea company the court of king b do not require that  the return to a writ of error to the court of c p returnable in king b be sign  by the chief justice of c p stram Writ of error upon a judgement in the common  plea which be direct as usual case tempt Hardwicke er p to sir r Eyre chief  justice and be return as usual likewise videlicet the answer of sir r Eyre  chief justice within name but the return not sign with the chief justice hand  as the practice be always to do and object that this be not a return and  therefore the proceed be now regular before the court upon this objection the  court take a day to consider and then the sense of the court be give by Lord  Hardwicke c j if this be consider as a objection take upon the record we have  former determine that there be do ground for such a exception for that there  be no law require such a sign there be no need for any name to appear in a  return till the stat of York e two c but that statute do not require that the  sheriff shall sign it but only that his name shall be put with the return so  that the court may know of who they take such return if deed be and therefore  as the cause now stand in the paper this judgement must be affirm but to put a  end to objection of this sort we be of opinion that it be no objection in this  court though we be inform that the court of common plea require it shall be do  but that it be only a matter of irregularity in that court with which we have  no more to do than we shall have with any irregularity in obtain a judgement  there when return here to we upon record by writ of error and as we can take  no notice of that so here the fact of the return be a matter entire under the  consideration of the court below but as this matter stand now before we it be  a return in the name of the chief justice and the record be proper before we  judgement affirm cite Tid see Yelv salk
BLADWELL against Edward a remember limit to a bastard make a feoff to the use  of himself for life after to the use of such issue or issue of the body of  mary Floyd from old to old as be repute to be get by the say Bladwell whether  he be lawful or unlawful and in that case by all but Popham that that be a  good remainder limit to a bastard for a son in reputation suffice to make he a  purchaser as it hold Elizabeth die and although that in of Elizabeth t be hold  that a man can by way of covenant raise a use to his bastard yet by way of  limitation of a use upon a feoff this otherwise and although Littleton say  that a bastard be no one thread first that be only as to the inherit any man  that be intend that he have not any father but without question he have a  mother and so shall be term in law the issue of his mother and the law do not  regard if the issue be lawful or not in a purchase a bastard be thread no one  father in law but in reputation otherwise it may be as the case be also note  by cook if a have issue son and the old be a bastard and a remainder also be  limit to the old issue of a the second tun that be a mulier shall take and not  the bastard for in general word the constrict cion shall be in worthy sensum  but if the word be special as in this case otherwise it be for modus assembly  vincu law and he cite Plowden who often say that a woman may give land in  frank marriage with her bastard
BLADWELL against SLEGGEIN guildhall London in debt on a contract for twenty  pound defendant may give in evidence under the general issue that it be only  for twenty mark in debt the plaintiff declare upon a sale of certain wood for  twenty pound and the defendant plead nil debet per patron dyer a er p and upon  evidence it appear that the bargain be only twenty mark the jury by the  opinion of Catlin chief justice and a brown shall be bind to give verdict for  the defendant in this case as well as when the variance of the contract be of  thing sell accord to e a pl because it can be intend the same contract a quare  whether there be not some difference because the plea be he do not owe the sum  or any part thereof in form as c whence in detinue e a pl of a chain contain  three ounce and in truth it contain only two the defendant may safe wage his  law otherwise be it if the variance be only in the price or value in the  exchequer car Walton and boat be case in assumpsit for eleven pound the  plaintiff count for diverse sum of money lend at several time the jury find  that it be a debt of only ten pound yet he have judgement and shall be bar for  the residue for it be for diverse thing it be otherwise where there be one  entire contract Elizabeth Billingesley bring a action upon a assumpsit to pay  twelve pound the jury find a promise to pay seven pound judgement reverse  because it be not the same assumpsit Inst a hob dyer hilary term queen  Elizabeth
BLAGNEYS case a gentleman pensioner be a officer on the cheque roll be exempt  from serve on jury at the first sit at nisi prius in Middlesex one Blagney be  excuse from serve on the jury he be a gentleman pensioner which be a officer  upon the case tempt Hardwicke er p cheque roll or exchequer roll be a roll or  book contain the name of such as be attendant on or in pay of the king or  other great person as their household servant year car two c year Henry VIII c  Henry VII c Cunn law Dict title check roll the Chequer roll be mention in the  preamble to that singular statute entitle the bill for the household Hen VIII  c for per Lord Hardwicke c j the officer on the cheque roll have a ancient  privilege not to be swear on jury see Rep
Blagrave and HUPKINS how far the court will direct that paper book shall be  make agreeable to the declaration deliver in the declaration deliver there  want pledge for which cause the defendant demurrer and the plaintiff demand  oyer of the bill on which pledge be enter and then join in demurrer motion be  now make that the paper book may be make agreeable to the declaration deliver  and the motion be grant
Blagrave v Wotton an ancient deity a like injunction grant for not pay the  queen fine where the action be trespass to the damage of mark and for breach  of the say injunction choice case in chancery er p the defendant be commit to  the prison of the fleet and now upon motion he be ready to pay the fine upon  payment whereof he be discharge of his imprisonment Blagrave plaintiff Wotton  defendant year Elizabeth
BLAGROVE and wood case in trespass the question be if a copyhold be surrender  or not and that e custom be allege to he that a copybolder may surrender out  of the court to the steward out of the manor and the steward be retain only by  word but have no patent walmesley he may he steward by word well enough but  Windham Godbolt er p and Anderson hold that he may he steward by word only in  possession that be when he hold a court in possession but he can be steward  out of court without a patent because he be then out of possession and  therefore it be the opinion of the whole court that the surrender out of court  to the steward by word be not good
BLAINFIELD versus march mich Ann in person holt c j at nisi prius at guildhall  far S c trover by administrator on the intestate possession defendant can give  in evidence a will on the general issue otherwise if on administrator own  possession salk far ante Mod case holt the plaintiff bring trover as  administrator and declare upon the possession of the intestate and upon not  guilty plead at the trial the counsel for the defendant offer to give in  evidence that the pretend intestate make a will and a executor but holt c j  overrule it and take this diversity that where a administrator bring trover  upon his own possession the defendant may give in evidence a will and a  executor upon not guilty otherwise if it be on the possession of the intestate  as in the principal case for there the defendant ought to plead it in  abatement and if he do not he shall not give it in evidence
BLAINFIELD versus march mich Ann salk far the plaintiff bring trover as  administrator and declare upon the possession of the intestate and on not  guilty plead the counsel for the defendant holt KB offer holt KB er p to give  in evidence at the trial that the pretend intestate make a will and a executor  holt CJ take this diversity that where a administrator bring trover upon his  own possession the defendant may give a will in evidence and a executor upon  not guilty but this otherwise if it be on the possession of the intestate for  there the defendant ought to plead it in abatement and if he do not he shall  not give it in evidence so it be overrule
BLAKEBONE and hall against brown Intr Elizabeth b r rot in a action of debt  upon a obligation the defendant plead the statute h cap of oblige to the  sheriff and allege that a and b his surety have not sufficient in that county  c and so the obligation Noy void Hubbard and adjudge that the obligation be  good for that clause be for the security and indemnity of the sheriff the  which if he will he may waive and it differ from the case of h upon W for  there the plead es be for the benefit of the party and that it have be so  adjudge m Elizabeth c b rot Clifton against web where one of the surety be  insufficient and gawdy deny blow and say that it have be adjudge to the  contrary that a obligation with one surety be good enough and kempe secondary  also remember that but Godfrey of counsel on the contrary say that it be  adjudge in burr and Appletons case that the plaintiff in the first suit may  have a action upon the case against the sheriff if Noy er p he do not take  sufficient security which case be not deny and by gawdy that a bind without  any surety be good enough between the sheriff and the obligor and by Fenner  that it have be so adjudge Poph be absent but judgement for the plaintiff
Blakeman and goff how far the court will not grant a second certiorari by  reason that it be move for with a intent to reverse a judgement on rule to  show cause why a certiorari shall not be quash for its be test Roberto Eyre  whereas it shall have be Roberto Raymond Mr fazakerly submit it that the  certiorari may be amend but Mr Parker observe on the other side that it can  not because the fault be in the testae of the writ and for this purpose cite  lev accord the court be of the same opinion upon which Mr fazakerly move for a  new certiorari but the court say it be well know that the party be never  entitle to a second certiorari and in the present case the design of this  certiorari be to reverse a judgement for which reason they declare they will  not grant a second to inform their conscience as they sometime do and Lord  Raymond observe that in the case of ware and Stokoe Lord chief justice holt  refuse to amend a writ of error single for that reason because it be to  reverse a judgement accord the rule be make absolute
BLAKEWAY v earl OF strafford Oct Eq Abr S c Sel can in Ch S c p wms SC bro p c  and Edward bro p c S c bill to be pay a debt of twenty year stand due from sir  Thomas Johnson by his will he direct his personal estate to be apply in  payment of his debt and if the personal estate shall not be sufficient then  his real estate to be subject to his debt the defendant plead the statute of  limitation the plea on argument be overrule the will direct his debt to be pay  take the case out of the statute Mews dig limitation statute of d ill see case  in h l bro p c see in re Stephens Ch d
blakey vers birmingham amendment post the judgement be that the plaintiff  shall recover instead of do recover and after error the court amend it as the  misprision of the clerk foster v Blackwell c b barn send for et vide Waldock v  Cooper will
blancard and GALDY salk Mod c Jamaica law of conquer d country remain after  conquest debt upon a bind for performance of covenant whereby the defendant  agree to pay the plaintiff l per annum for a deputation of the office of  provost martial of Jamaica the defendant plead the statute Edward and that  Comberbach Jamaica be part of the possession of the crown of England the  plaintiff reply that after the conquest thereof it be govern d by the law of  this kingdom the defendant rejoin that after the conquest thereof it be govern  d by the law of that island whereunto it shall seem the plaintiff demurrer d  and it be adjudge d for he for the law of the conqueror do not take place till  establish law of Wales remain d till stat h the isle of man be part of the  possession of the crown yet not govern d by the law of England and where it be  say in Calvin S case that the law of a conquer d heathen country do immediate  cease that may be true of law for religion but it seem otherwise of law touch  the government Comberbach er p
BLANCHET v foster April see Goddard v snow Russ bind by a woman about to marry  without her intend husband knowledge but for valuable consideration in respect  of a antecedent debt hold the husband can not be relieve against it  concealment however of such security and debt not to be encourage this  principle be recognize in lady Strathmore v bow et e contra Ves jun but that  case turn on particular circumstance of stratagem and fraud on the part of the  husband see bro SC and Ves jun c supplement bill by husband after wife death  to be relieve against a bind give by her to her aunt just upon the marriage  Lord chancellor if a woman about to marry part with part of her property or  give a security or assignment they be relievable against in this court but  where a debt be contract for valuable consideration though conceal from the  husband it be no fraud on the marriage but concealment of such security or  debt be not to be encourage therefore as this be conceal from the husband at  the time and long after the marriage I shall excuse the husband the cost on  dismiss his bill on which I can give no relief as a consideration be positive  swear to in the answer and it come on by bill and answer but it be also swear  that it be at the request of the wife herself that the obligee conceal this  from the husband if therefore vesey senior she have survive he she can not  have say her aunt shall lose her cost because of that concealment at her own  request the plaintiff be administrator to and stand in place of his wife and  the bill must be dismiss with cost to be tax Reg lib a fol
bland against Featherstone mich geo action on the statute of usury defendant  plead motion per draper for leave for the prosecutor to compound on the  statute Elizabeth which composition barn er p without leave be penal Bootle  consent for defendant and a rule be make pursuant to the motion cost and bill  OF cost
bland and MIDDLETON heir relieve against a conditional devise for his life  devise condition by will in write I S seize in fee devisethLand to his  daughter e and her heir and his mind be if his son a pay to her pound then his  son shall leave that land the money be not pay at the day appoint by the will  the daughter sell the land it be decree by the Lord chancellor against the  vendee on pay the money for he take it but as in the nature of a security  though it be object by sir Fr winnington that this be a contingent devise to  the son on payment and then too if he have perform and pay he can have have  but a estate for life the remainder or reversion in fee to the daughter note  it be no reason that his failer shall give the son a great estate in equity  than the will in write give he on performance of the condition by the express  word of the will in write and the will can be of land but in write so as if  the testator have make such will in write have by parole declare that the son  shall have the feesimple on payment it shall not avail yet it be decree ut  above quaere si bene for it be apparent contrary to the word of the will and  the intent of the testator and the heir be only to be prefer in doubtful case  Chan c Chan c
bland and very after what length of time bail may be allow to surrender the  principal what shall be a good to know facias against bail Mr Harvey move that  proceed upon a to know facias against bail may be stay upon a affidavit that  the bail be serve with the to know facias but the day before it be returnable  and they surrender the principal the day after the return but Mr strange on  the other side answer that the writ be leave in the office four day and upon  two nihils no other notice be requisite but upon judgement be against the  principal the bail be bind to search the court think this practice hard and  upon that they inquire of the master whether it be constant observe the master  report that it be and say that former this use to be more hard upon the bail  for upon two nihils return the first and second to know facias use to be take  out both together and there be no certain time for either lie in the office  but now he say this be otherwise and beside as nigh as can be there must be  the same time for the return of the one to know facias as the other the one  must be seven the other eight day and not one four and the other eleven the  court however declare that this practice may be dangerous and say it be hard  than where two nihils be return for there the party have his remedy against  the sheriff but here the sheriff may execute his writ on the day of the return  they observe far that this be more hard in this court because the to know  faciass can only go to the sheriff of Middlesex let the cause of action arise  in any county but in the common plea they go to the sheriff of the proper one  accord the proceed be stay
bland vers PAKENHAN practice the court hold that the presence of a attorney of  c b at the execution of a warrant to enter up judgement in b r be sufficient  Vilmott v Barry Esq barn S p in c b
Bland versus Edmonds pasch James rotulo action upon the case bring for these  word videlicet George Bland be a troublesome fellow and he do combine with you  to trouble the country and I hope to see you at the next session indict for  barratry or for sheepstealing as George Bland be at the last session for Bland  be indict the last session for sheepstealing and it be hold by the whole court  that those word will not hear a action the plaintiff lie the word to be speak  to one I eagle and the declaration be hold nought and insufficient because it  be not aver that the plaintiff be indict at the session
bland versus HASELRIG elsewhere Q Mod Mod sand sand lev lev salk to Mod c Lutw  postea quarto James favorable the case be a assumpsit be bring against four  who plead non assumpser infra sex aged and the verdict be that one of the  defendant do assume infra sex aged and the other non assumpsit and it be move  that no judgement can be give against the defendant upon who the verdict be  find for this be a indeb assump for good sell and it be a entire contract and  they must all be find to promise or else it be against the plaintiff tort be  in their nature several so one defendant may be find guilty and the other not  guilty but it be not so in action ground upon contract pollexfen chief justice  Powell and Rokeby be of opinion in this case that the plaintiff can not have  judgement Ventris incline to the contrary be admit if a indebitat assumpsit be  bring against four and they plead non assumps and find that one of they assume  this be against the plaintiff for he fail in his action but in the case at bar  it may be take Ventris that they do all promise at first and that one of they  only renew the promise within six year the plea of non assumpsit infra sex  aged imply a promise at first and if one shall renew his promise within six  year it be reason it shall bind he and the plaintiff must sue they all or else  he will vary from the original contract but the chief justice seem to be of a  opinion that if the promise be renew within the six year yet if not upon a new  consideration it shall not bind and if there be a new consideration the action  will lie against he that promise alone say quaere for the common practice be  upon a plea of the statute of limitation to prove only a renew the promise  without any further consideration but a bare own the debt be not take to be  sufficient quaere if the first consideration upon repeat the promise within  six year be not enough to raise a new cause of action judgement be give for  the defendant
bland who tam against Fetherstone mich geo ill prac ring barn S c leave to  compound on a who tam BORRET in a action who tam on the statute of usury a  motion for leave to compound for the several sum for which the action be bring  and grant by the court with the consent of Mr sergeant Bootle for the  plaintiff note a rule for the same purpose without any consent therein be  produce which be make in the king bench in Trin term in the that year of king  Geo two dell who tam against Wyatt
BLANDS case case hob word averment need not be adj Tr b r smith Rooces c t m b  r Atkinson Witton George Bland bring a action upon the case against a b the  defendant have some communication with one eagle say that he be a troublesome  fellow and he doubt not but to see he indict at the next assize for barratry  or sheepstealing as George Bland be for George Bland be indict the last assize  for steal of sheep and it be not aver that he be not indict but that he be of  good fame it be move in arrest of judgement that it be not actionable and so  be the opinion of the court for it be not a direct Hutton affirmative vide the  case of steward against bishop before fol and if one say I suspect you for  steal my horse and judgement be give for the defendant trin James
BLANFORDS case a man seize of land in fee devise they unto his wife for life  and afterward to his two son if they have not issue male for their life and if  they have issue male then to their issue male and if they have not issue male  then if any of they have issue male to the say issue male the wife die the son  enter into the land and then the old son have issue male who afterward enter  and the young son enter upon the issue and do trespasser and the issue bring a  action of trespass and it be adjudge by the whole court that the action be  maintainable because by the birth of the issue male the land be devise out of  the two son and vest in the issue male of the old crook justice be against the  three other justice hill James in the king bench
blani against draper ante Wales upon a testatum become facias to the sheriff  of Mongomery on judgement in debt in b r lie in London the sheriff retorns  Edward c and that it be one of the twelve county of Wales and so where breve  domini king non to run and the court order it to be put in the paper and per  sander the sheriff be a officer of this court and so ought to be amerce this  be a execution there be no doubt of it on h c this be a weighty cause and the  party will else be in worse case than if he have recover in Wales and Edward c  be of remedial original writ which lie not in Wales nor county palatines but a  execution do Cr and hetley Mansell and Lewis Cr sir John carew case Bulstr  bedo and piper and Bulstr hall and Rotheram be express authority that a capias  or a become facias lie into Wales and to this the court agree and that the  sheriff be to be amerce albeit the party go into the exchequer general by quo  minus that be only in lieu of original writ but on statute staple such writ  daily issue forth
blank versus Newcomb mich W case W libel in the spiritual court for not pay a  parishrate for repair of the church  and suggest for a prohibition that all  parisbrates be to be make by a majority of the parishioner and that every rate  make after it be once collect become void and that this be not by a majority c  and that the suit be to pay this in pursuance of a old rate collect many year  before holt KB er p as to the first it be urge its not be by a majority of  parishioner be a matter only proper for a appeal and so be the inequality of  the rate Bulst as to the second that this present rate have rX deed reference  to a former one which have be collect but that be not to giorce or efficacy to  the former but only by way of direction of the Iatter accon bobert lee case  holt c j the right course be for the spiritual to give sufficient notice to  the parish to meet and make a rate for reparation of and for neglect c they  may be excommunicate but ecclesiastical c not make a rate or appoint to do it  and here the suggestion reccommissioners t gg tes a ancient rate which though  say be to be a stand order for all time to cornet and that they have confir  that rate and that the libel be for want of a new papment accord to it vide  Noy in point for a prohibition in this case a all that the spiritual court can  do be to make a order that the church be repair but not to assess a quantum
BLANKARD versus GALDY Trin W m salk Mod Comber in debt on a bind the defendant  plead the statute of Edward against buy office concern the administration of  justice and aver that this bind be give for the purchase of the office of  provost marshal in Jamaica and that it concern the administration of justice  and Jamaica be part of the possession of the crown of England to which the  plaintiff reply that Jamaica be a island beyond the sea which be conquer from  the Spaniard in the time of Q Elizabeth and the inhabitant be govern by their  own law and not by the law of England the defendant rejoin that before such  conquest they be govern by their own law but since that by the law of England  the plaintiff demurrer to the rejoinder c holt CJ cur in case of a uninhabited  country new find out by English subject all law in holt KB force in England be  in force there but Jamaica be conquer and not plead to be parcel of the  kingdom of England but part of the possession and revenue of the crown of  England the law of England do not take place there till declare so by the  conqueror or his successor the isle of man and Ireland be part of the  possession of the crown of England yet retain their ancient law and it be  impossible the law of this nation by mere conquest without more shall take  place in a conquer country because for a time there must want officer without  which our law can be execute Jamaica be not govern by the law of England after  the conquest thereof until new land be make for they have neither sheriff or  county but be only a assembly of people which be not bind by our law unless  particular mention and if our law do take place in a conquer d country yet  they in Jamaica have power to make new law our general law may be alter by  they in particular judgement be give for the plaintiff JEOFAILS
Blaxton versus heath in a action of debt by Blaxton against heath the case be  this a man possess of a term for twenty year in right of his wife make a lease  for ten year render rend to he his executor and assign and die and the  question be whether the wife shall have the rend after his death or his  executor and it be argue that the wife shall not have it because she be in by  a title paramount as if there be two jointtenants for life the one make a  lease for year render rend and die the other shall not have the rend dyer and  so of jointtenants in fee coke lib and Perkins accord to which Montague chief  justice agree for he say it be but a extract of ten out of twenty the  remainder continue as before and To give back be come back a turn again but it  be otherwise of a condition which be a new creature of which the wife shall  take no advantage crook justice this be a special reservation and therefore  the executor shall have it and not the wife for she come in paramount as in  the case of jointtenants Haughton agree thereunto and say that the rend shall  be incident to he who have the reversion under the lessor who be the executor  and Montague demand of Hobert chief justice of the common plea his opinion in  this case who agree that the wife shall not have it Popham er p the same term  in the same court
BLAYER against baldwin trin geo defendant have be arrest by a can sa on a old  judgement obtain in Trinity term without any revival of the judgement apply to  the court and obtain a rule to show cause why the can sa shall not be set  aside as irregular on show cause plaintiff produce a roll whereon continuances  be enter of a be made fa sue out within the year videlicet in April by sheriff  non to cause to go breve and can sa award thereon but the first be made fa nor  any other appear to be return by the sheriff the continuances enter as  aforesaid be deem insufficient to support the can sa on this old judgement not  revive by cognizant fa and the rule be make absolute to set aside the can sa  and for a supersedeas to discharge defendant with cost pool for defendant  prime and Davy for plaintiff
BLAYER versus baldwin c b a execution can be continue on the roll which be  never return or file within a year after final judgement give in this cause a  become facias be sue out in easter term and returnable on the morrow of the  ascension of our Lord in that term and be continue upon the roll down till  this term by sheriff Wilson king bench non to cause to go breve and the  defendant be this term take upon a capias ad to give satisfaction issue upon  the judgement it be move by sergeant pool that this be irregular there neither  be any to know facias to revive the judgement it be above a year old nor any  execution return by the sheriff to warrant the entry of the continuances on  the roll per curian the defendant must be discharge out of custody and the  plaintiff must pay the cost of this application for it be irregular to  continue a execution on the roll which be never return or file sergeant prime  and Davy for the plaintiff michaelmas term geo two
BLEKE against grove Siderf pl apprentice in a action of battery the defendant  plead that the plaintiff be his servant and for negligence in his business he  correct he beyond the plaintiff also have release not say by deed for which  cause the plaintiff demurrer for doubleness allege such plead as be in  abatement to be so h b by Thirning where neither be sufficient bar if distinct  matter on which issue may be take be offer h h b Edward b the reason of which  be Edward per Thorpe Twisden conceive a ill plea none at all as this at bar be  without show the release but it be double so by Windham it be a plain double  plea without offer it by write for if it be such a plea as if it be sufficient  set forth will be double matter although a insufficient plea it be double and  by Twisden plea general quod to free be good before assumpsit bring but after  it must be allege for special cause hide agree it be double and both if true  good plead judgement for the plaintiff nisi
BLEMERHASSET against Pierson defeasance of a duty due by obligation can be  without deed which a write under band do not imply viner ab Com dig defeasance  c debt on obligation condition for payment of several sum at several day the  defendant plead payment of all the Himself S due before such day at which day  the plaintiff by his write which the defendant bring into court sign with his  hand agree to defer the payment of the residue till another day not yet come  the plaintiff deniurs general and judgement be give for he for the action be  find on a deed no defeazance can be make thereof afterward without deed and a  write under hand do not imply a deed
BLEMMER HASSIET versus Humberstone ejection firm a copyhold may be extinguish  without a actual surrender norf in a ejection firm bring by Ralph  Blemmerbasset against William Humberstone for the land in Puckletborp upon a  lease make by John b upon a special verdict find it be resolve that when a  copyholder bargain and sell his copyhold to the lord of the manor which have  the manor in lease for year that thereby the copyhold estate be extinguish and  the Lord Hobart say that if a copyholder come into court and say that he be  weary of his copyhold and request the lord to take it that be a surrender for  hetween the lord and the tenant a conveyance shall not need to be accord to  the customer for the copyholder have no other use of the customer but only to  convey the land to another with coke lib that a release by he which have right  to a copyhold to one which be admit copyholder extinguish the right of the  copyhold by deed and if a copyholder release to the lord that extinguish the  copyhold although it be contrary to the nature of a release to give a  possession it be agree here that this copyhold be not extinct but the lord  which be lessee for year dominus pro temporal may grant it by copy de to make  new mich James
BLENKARNE against osborne appeal Nels Abr pl c ibidem the plaintiff bring his  bill of appeal of felony before the justice of gaoldelivery for the county of  Derby against the defendant then in the gaol of the say county and declare  thereupon and the defendant imparle and be afterward bail but Jones t er p  afterward the record be remove into b r by certiorari and the party appear  there in person and on oyer of the record of the appeal the defendant imparle  to another day and then demurrer on the bill of appeal and for cause show that  the plaintiff non come upon plegios ad prosequend appellum and plead over to  the felony not guilty the plaintiff join in demurrer and on argument resolve  that pledge may be find any time before judgement h   dr Husleys case and  thereupon the plaintiff come upon plegios and issue be take upon not guilty
Blestow v sawyer equity case abridge er report date personal estate as she  think proper all that she die possess of be to be take to be her separate  estate or the produce of it unless the contrary can be make appear and as she  have a power over the principal so she may dispose of the produce or interest  hill gore and knight vern Prec in Chan SC Bletsow v sawyer vern equity case  abridge S p where it be say that there have be several decree ratify such  disposition if a woman by her marriagearticle agree to have no part of the  husband be personal estate but what he shall give her by will this bar her of  her paraphernalia Cholmely v Cholmely vern
blewett versus bainard hill Geo rot a juror withdraw for a view may be swear  at the second trial SC comens on error from c b it be assign that Abraham  sander who on the first trial be withdraw in order for a view be swear on the  second panel and in nullo be erratum plead the plea of in nullo be erratum be  agree to be a confession of the fact and a demurrer to the matter of law and  at first the court incline this be error because it must be take he be strange  withdraw as a person admit by both party to be improper to try the cause but  afterward on consideration they hold it to be right enough and that if it be a  exception it shall have be take before he be swear but be withdraw only for a  view they hold it will be no objection and affirm the judgement
blewit against Perkins ejectment if the declaration in ejectment be deliver  after the essoin day it be but enter as of that term and not of the term  before and the plaintiff in such case can have judgement the same term but if  he do not move the follow term to have judgement especial if any assize  intervene he can have it without new notice leave at the house of the  defendant and the default make as at first per curian ex motion Keeling for  judgement c
BLEWITS case a lunatic Richard blewit esquire be seize of the manor of  Holcombe king for life within which be many copyhold tenant grantable by copy  of courtrolls for one life in possession and another in reversion grant the  stewardship thereof by deed under his hand and seal to William Sliman for life  with a fee of S for execute thereof and afterward become lunatic and non  compos chin and so find by inquisition and thereupon commit to Edward  Chichester esquire and other under the seal of this court question whether the  steward with the consent of the committee or the committee themselves by their  steward may grant estate by copy accord to the custom of the say manor  whereupon it be resolve by the Lord chief justice Hubbart and chief baron lie  Tanfield that the say committee can grant any copiliold estate for that they  themselves by law have no estate in the say manor nor be lord thereof for the  time be but do resolve that the say lunatic by his steward may grant copyhold  estate of and in the say several manor respective accord to the custom of the  same whereupon it be decree accord nevertheless it be order that the say  steward shall grant none without the privity of the committee nor before the  court be acquaint therewith and give warrant for the grant thereof but note  this be in discretion and the grant by the steward good in law and this mere  by way of caution for the benefit of the say lunatic and jurisdiction of the  court mich James king
blick against HALPENN and his wife the husband abscond and can not be take but  the wife be arrest by mesne process and move in the treasury that a common  appearance may be accept for her which be order on hear the atorneys on both  side the reason be that if the wife be to be hold to bail it will be in the  power of the husband to set up a sham action against her and keep her in  continual imprisonment otherwise if the hus barn band and wife have be both  take in that case both shall be hold till bail be give for both the reason be  that otherwise a woman may marry a prisoner and thereby be free from  imprisonment herself defraud her creditor roll Abr smith and story Syd cro car  Trin W Clarkson against watkinson and wife in b r
BLIEDSTYN versus Sedgwick sit in London after term parole evidence not admit  of the purport of write evidence without show it be lose in action upon a  policy of insurance of a ship the ship have be condemned by the court of  admiralty abroad in Carolina and the act of the condemnation give to the  captain be since lose by bad weather at sea and the question be whether the  captain may give parole evidence of the reason that court go upon in  condemning the ship I Lord Hardwicke c j will not suffer it to be do for the  rule be that you can give evidence of write evidence that may be produce  without show that it be lose see t r Str d but what be here lose be only copy  of the evidence and if you think it material you shall have the proceed  themselves here and not give parole evidence of what they be see I Str n also  peak c sacred scripture case tempt Hardwicke er p
BLINKEHORNE v feast Oct cost where the heir at law bring a bill to dispute a  will or a bill be bring against he to establish a will if a devisee bring his  bill to perpetuate testimony and pray no relief the defendant be entitle to  cost if he have not examine or only crossexamined the plaintiff witness but if  the defendant examine witness on his own part he be not entitle to cost where  a devisee bring his bill to perpetuate testimony and pray relief and bring the  cause to a hear and the defendant the heir at law insist on a trial and the  will be establish on such trial the court have in many instance give cost to  the heir both in this court as at law where he have not be vexatious nor  guilty of tamper because he can never afterward dispute the will if a bill be  bring by a infant heir to dispute a will and the bill be dismiss the plaintiff  shall pay cost because he may notwithstanding bring a bill on come of age or  ejectment indeed it be not certain whether another prochein any may not bring  a bill
blisset and Cranwell in c b what word make a jointtenancy or tenancy in common  a man make his will in these word I give all my land in dale to my two son b  and c and their heir for ever and the survivor of they equal to be divide  between they and their heir after the death of my wife b devise all his  interest to e and die the wife die the devisee of b claim a moiety now the  question be whether b and c be jointtenants or tenant in common it be adjudge  by Treby Nevil and rookbi contra Powel that they be tenant in common they cite  cro levuin and dod and SC roll Furze and Comberbach week though the word  survivor regular make a jointtenancy yet the subsequent word do explain and  alter the sense of the precedent judgment pro quer
blithman and Martin case John blithman bring a action upon the case against  Martin upon a assumpsit and recover and it be move that because the Godbolt  consideration which uva the cause of the action be against law that the  judgement may he stay for the plaintiff do allege the same to he in  consideration that if the plaintiff be gaoler of such a prison in Devonshire  will deliver one who be in execution for debt he promise to give he twenty  pound and he allege begin that he do deliver he the debt not be satisfy and  because the consideration be to do a thing which be against the law the  opinion of the court be that it be void and that the plaintiff hold not have  judgement pasch James in the king bench
Blois v bet march see Vaughan v Vaughan supr dick a surety for a receiver have  procure himself to be discharge the receiver enter into a fresh recognizance  but the time for enrol be elapse dickens it be order to be enter nunc pro tune  it be however add that the same be not to take effect if any intermediate  purchaser or encumbrance for a valuable consideration of the land of the  cognisors but from the time of the enrolment dickens er p
bloomer case archbishop certificate against bloomer for not pay a maid portion  bloomer have marry the widow of Nanfan who have forfeit a recognizance to the  archbishop of Canterbury for not pay of her daughter portion entreat the  bishop of Canterbury to take a new recognizance and discharge the former  bloomer after find that his wife land be entail use mean to have her by fine  or recovery to put it into fee that so it may be subject to the recognizance  and hope to get it from his wife also one bridge his wife kinsman withstand  this now die the woman the portion unpay bloomer be sue for it in chancery and  the opinion of the court against he the bishop of Canterbury have certify  against he and because his counsel be not caryi ready that day the chancellor  declare he must take the archbishop certificate not as a testimony but as a  judicial proceed and therefore will bloomer to satisfy the archbishop or else  he must decree against he hill James
bloss against Holman John Bloss bring a action of trespass quare way arms for  take of his good against Holman and the defendant plead not guilty and the  jury give a special verdict videlicet that the plaintiff at the time of the  trespass be of the mystery of the mercer and that at that time the defendant  be his servant and put in trust to sell his good and merchandise in shopa svan  ibidem de tempore in time and that he take the good of the plaintiff name in  the declaration and carry they away and pray the advice of the court if the  defendant be culpable or not and upon the postea return Shuttleworth pray  judgement for the plaintiff and the doubt be because the declaration be quare  way arms because it appear that the defendant have custody of the good but  Shuttleworth doubt whether he have custody and cite the case of Littleton  videlicet if I give my sheep to compasture c and he kill they a action of  trespass lie and the justice hold that in this case the action do well lie and  periam say that the defendant have only a authority and not custody or  possession and judgement be give for the plaintiff h king h and Windham say  that if he have imbezelld his master good without question it be felony quod  to be concession Anderson absent and the law will not presume that the good be  out of the possession of the plaintiff and the next day come the Lord Anderson  and rehearse the case and say that the defendant have neither general nor  special property in the good for it be plain be can have no general property  and special he have not for he can not have a action of trespass if they be  take away then if he have no property a trespass lie against he if he take  they so if a shepherd steal sheep it be felony for he have no property in they  wherefore he give judgement accord mich and Elizabeth rot
BLOURES case the certificate of commissioner delegate of appeal from the  prerogative court of Canterbury of a excommunication be good evidence the  certificate of a excommunication by special commissioner delegate by the queen  commission under their common seal upon a appeal from the definitive sentence  publish in the prerogative court of Canterbury be allow and golden good enough  in the common bench quaere
blow versus Ailre hill elizab rotulo in a replevin the question be upon these  word to wit the say abbot and covent grant to the say r that he and his assign  shall have fireboot cartboot and ploughboot sufficient by the appointment c  without make waste under the penalty of forfeit the devise whether those word  make a condition or no and by the whole court ield to be a condition but  judgement be give for the plaintiff for doubleness in the plea Brownlow  goldsborough demand not necessary in a replevin for rend
blower against KETCHMERE proof in evidence to a jury at bar of Essex in  ejectment Maynard pro defendant offer a exemplify under the great seal in of  deposition in chancery whereby a conveyance make in and lose be prove and the  court agree that be so old and the record of the roll burn since it be good  evidence though the bill and answer be not in it which per Twisden and Maynard  be use but year last pass and before it be not usual to insert the bill and  answer and this be give in evidence in former trial here at bar though it  appear to be a bill of discovery by Francis more against Richard more his  father under who the plaintiff claim as heir the defendant as purchaser  because the deposition of such be never publish without notice give to both  party the defendant make title by a fine against which the plaintiff oppose a  continual claim by the issue in tail by enter and claim which per curian do  but strengthen the estate of the conusee unless some mean be use to prosecute  the claim as by action also a fine by tenant in tail and five year non claim  by his Keble issue do bar all and every issue of such issue so of non claim by  the disseizee five year after fine levy by the disseizsor all his issue be bar  and so be Fermors case but contra on fine levy by feoff of seize but every one  that be in of a new estate as reversion c have new time Keble er p
blower v MORRET April atk S c cost to be pay out of a estate be a lie thereon  and do not drop with the party though not tax by the decree all party be to be  pay their cost out of the estate the defendant Morret and wife die before the  cost be tax intestate and insolvent Mr boldero their solicitor apply this day  for the master to proceed to tax their cost and to be pay the same it be  object by the residuary devisee and legatee that the cost not be tax can not  be consider as a debt or judgement and not be so and the suit be abate and  nothing remain to be do under the decree the suit can not be revive and  consequent the cost drop with the party Lord Hardwicke c there be a  distinction between personal cost and cost to be pay out of a estate cost when  decree out of a estate be a lie thereon which make it a security and there be  nothing executory there be no occasion to revive therefore let the master  proceed to tax the say late defendant cost and let the same when tax be pay to  Mr boldero their solicitor July Buckby v bird by sir Thomas clarke m r similar  determination see Barry v Stawell Flan king for previous proceed see SC Ves
Bluck contra gore pasch car a purchaser claim by the bill by good assurance  and conveyance good without set forth what the plaintiff allege by the bill  that m W and king W by good and sufficient conveyance and assurance in the law  have grant to he and his heir their three part of the premise in question and  pray relief against the defendant who be in possession by mortgage from a  ancestor the defendant demurrer for that the plaintiff set not forth what kind  of conveyance or assurance be make to he or when execute so as the court may  judge whether the plaintiff have any Title and therefore demand judgement and  whether he shall be call to any account chancery report for any profit it  appear the plaintiff be never in possession and overrule
BLUDWICK and wife executor against usborne executor same term rule to show  cause why defendant shall not have leave to add to former plead already plead  by leave of the court two new plead discharge the question be matter of title  and the cause to be try at the sit after term defendant have time to apply  last term he be under no surprise plaintiff can it barn now be prepare to  answer new matter Bootle and pool for defendant prime and draper for plaintiff
bluet a Dane against bampfield and other merchant of Denmark bill dismiss by  sentence give against the plaintiff in the court at Denmark to be relieve  against action of trespass for seize their good in the island of c on the  pretence of break a inhibition of the king of Denmark whereas by article of  alliance between the crown of England case in chancery and Denmark free Trade  be allow to all English in all port of the kingdom of Denmark whereof the  island be a port but in regard sentence be give in the court there for the  plaintiff on the seizure the bill be dismiss
blunket and freeman how far a elegit may be amend Mr Kettleby come to show  cause why a elegit shall not be amend which recite the judgement to be george  recently king whereas it shall be year royal power our men he say that  whatever power the court may have of amend writ of execution yet he hope the  court will not do it as this case be circumstance because the defendant have  not only get possession upon the elegit but have actual bring a ejectment Mr  strange say that that be the very reason why they want the amendment because  as this writ be they can not maintain their ejectment accord the court make  the rule absolute because there be the very judgement produce which warrant  the amendment
blunt against collins enter trin car condition to pay l after the death of the  defendant wife to the plaintiff to be pay as the wife shall dispose qr I Nels  Abr c in debt on bind for l after oyer of the condition which be to pay l to  the plaintiff and deliver a bed complete furnish within a month after the  death of the defendant wife memorand it be agree before the seal c that the  wife may dispose of the say to who she will in her lifetime to be pay by the  plaintiff accord he be only trustee of the wife in the say bind the defendant  plead that the defendant wife with his consent make her will and thereby  bequeathe of the say l to several person and the residue and all that she can  give to her husband the defendant and make he executor and afterward die and  so she dispose of the say l c in her life on a demurrer to this plea judgement  be give for the plaintiff for the l ought to be pay to the plaintiff  notwithstanding the disposal
blunt against lord hastings Leicester where a peer be defendant the want of  knight on the panel be good cause of challenge to the array and now at this  day come as well the aforesaid million blunt as the aforesaid Edward Hastings  knight Lord Hastings by their atorneys aforesaid and the recognitors of the  assize aforesaid be exact likewise come and upon this the say Edward h knight  Lord h challenge the array of the panel of the assize aforesaid because he say  that he be and on the day of sue out the original writ of the assize aforesaid  S on the d day of may in the second year of the reign of our lady the now  queen and before be one of the great man and peer of this realm have place and  voice in every parliament of the say realm and that the principal panel of the  say assize be array and make by t Lucy dyer a er p esquire late sheriff of the  aforesaid county of Leicester and that the panel of ten recognitors of that  assize be here at this day new appoint array and make by W skevington esquire  now sheriff of the country aforesaid no knight be name and return in the say  panel as there ought to have be accord to the privilege and custom of this  realm in such case from tithe whereof memory be not to the contrary use and  approve and this he be ready to verify wherefore he pray judgement and that  those panel may be do away and quash c and to this the plaintiff demurrer and  it be adjudge a good challenge a wherefore the array and panel be quash and a  writ award to the coroner to make a new panel and this in last autumn the like  be adjudge in the bench in assize between Newdigate plaintiff and the earl of  Derby defendant in the time of queen mary S m and p and m for b above
blunt and blunt how far a amend bill shall be consider as a new bill chess Mr  Wilbraham move that the defendant may stand commit for put in five  insufficient answer but it appear that the plaintiff amend his bill before the  two last come in and therefore the court say the motion be too early for a  amend bill be as a new bill
blunt and his wife against hutchinson blunt and his wife bring a quare hinder  against Hutchinson and make title to present to the church in the right of his  wife and after the issue join and before the venire facias the wife die and  the plaintiff show that himself have take out a venire facias in his own name  and upon that Harris demurrer in law because be suppose that the writ be abate  but winch be of opinion that the writ be not not abate because this be a  chattel vest in the husband during the life of the wife
blunt archer and carpenter defendant in a bill at the suit of the vicar of  Gillingham in ken for tithe of the manor of Uxbury and other land belong to  the rectory impropriate of Gillingham aforesaid the tithe demand be for eight  year last pass and end in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred sixty  and one the case upon hear appear to be that for diverse year before the bill  exhibit in the time of many vicar the say tithe have be enjoin by the say  vicar of Gillingham aforesaid but a endow Hardres er p mean be produce bear  date the seven of march in the year one thousand three hundred sixty two  mention to have be make by Islipp then archbishop of Canterbury and preserve  in the archbishop register by which it do not appear that the vicar be endow  with Hardres any tithe of corn or grain for in the say instrument of endowment  be liberty reserve to the archbishop as be usual in such case to augment or  diminish c and it be thereupon insist that the vicar ought not to have those  tithe but the court hold that where a vicar have use time out of mind or for a  long time to take tithe or other profit he shall not be conclude by their not  be express in the endowment of the vicarage and that it have be often so hold  and rule and it shall be presume by reason of a long possession of such tithe  c that the vicarage have at some time or other be augment therewith and the  not reserve such a power to the archbishop be not material for a augmentation  may have be notwithstanding with the assent of or upon cite all party but not  without notice or citation as it may be when such a power as aforesaid be  reserve to the archbishop
blunt v clitherow between the year and Lord Hardwicke c No precedent have be  find where a testator have direct the residue of his personal estate to be lie  out in a purchase of land and settle to the use of daughter and their heir as  tenant in common with cross remainder that the dickens residue have be divide  and lie out in separate purchase for the conveniency of each daughter and yet  be settle to the use of the settlement and therefore his lordship after decree  the necessary account direct the residue of the personal estate to be lie out  in land and settle agreeable to the limitation in the will
blunt vers mither in c b where no more cost than damage Rep Eq SC verbatim  decree trespass for break and enter the plaintiff house and keep the plaintiff  out of the use of the house with a continuando for a month whereby the  plaintiff be put to great expense to regain the possession and in the mean  time lose the profit and use of it there be a verdict pro quer and S d damage  and upon motion for full cost they be deny by the court for this be a plain  trespass strange report er p quare enclosed space to break in pieces and the  per quod be only aggravation and in this case the title to the freehold may  have come in question and if so there shall have be a certificate of the judge  which not be in this case the plaintiff can have no more cost than damage  Appleton v smith burr S p vide beck v Nicholls ante and the case collect in  hullock on cost p to
blurton and toon pasch W skin at guildhall in a action of debt upon a  obligation and non be factum plead a witness be swear who say that his hand be  subscribe as a witness holt KB but that he do not see the obligation seal and  deliver the court demand of he if ever be set his hand as a witness but where  he see the seal and delivery he say no but that he never see it upon which one  be swear to prove the hand of the other witness who be dead which be oppose  but holt CJ say that a man shall not lose his obligation because they have  tamper with his witness and he allow the plaintiff to prove the obligation by  comparison of hand of the other witness
BOARMAN against arton executor OFELTONHEAD covenant in action of covenant on  lease for year that the lessor nor any of his tenant shall not dig gravel  other then for repair the lessor have before make another lease before of kill  which lessee leas over part of his term and if the sublessee may be say tenant  to the lessor they find by special verdict for the plaintiff if not for the  defendant Barwell for the defendant that the lessee have but a liberty to dig  on demise of the two wharf in the gravelpits which be in the hand of other  tenant and the underlessees be possess of the kill which have also liberty to  dig and be most proper tenant to the mesne lessee and not to the lord  paramount or lessor also the meaning shall not be extend against a stranger as  the underlessee be and on who the lessor as Yelverton have no tie the case of  condition and covenant differ not as to this purpose it be here intend of  undertenant of the soil in which the covenantee have liberty to dig for tenant  of other land will be trespasser by dig and so can be intend to be restrain by  covenant Keeling conceive the case strong that these be undertenant within the  covenant which may intend other tenant then those of soil which the court  agree and by hide if signior where freeholder and copyholder seize of chalkpit  leas it with such covenant against his tenant and undertenant if lessee of  copiholder dig the covenant be break Adjornatur
BOBINGTON and parry how far good can be bring into court in a action of trover  in a action of trover for several good Mr agar move to bring a lace head into  court or else the money it have be appraise at but the court say they never  allow good to be bring into court and they can not allow of the motion
BOCKENHAXS case bail for strike in westminsterhall body for body SC side keb  he be bring into court immediate for beat of a man in westminsterhall to sit  curian and oblige to find surety to appear to a indictment which be four  person each oblige in a recognizance and also body for body to stand to the  judgement upon the indictment and Twysden say that though on a assault and  battery in another place the party strike may justify the strike the other  again yet he can do so when he be strike in Westminster hall sit the court nor  in the churchyard Bockenham have say that harlston have strike he first and  afterward in Hillary car he be try at the bar for this upon a information and  a verdict against he that be strike beat wound and evil entreat harlston and  be plead a pardon which recite the information omit levinz to beat that he  beat and pardon the beat omit the wound and yet the pardon be allow for it be  hold by the court that the word percussi he strike include the beat and the  wound be not material for the strike make the offence be there any wound or  not also the pardon bad general word videlicet all malefeasances in the  information contain and he be discharge be immediate arrest at the suit of  Lenthal the marshal for that Lenthal have pay for he for ail escape and the  court permit the arrest
bocking and simons hill banc sup error to reverse a judgement in the common  plea a writ of error be bring to reverse a judgement give in the common plea  and the error assign be that the action be bring against person one of who be  within age and that they all appear by attorney whereas he within age ought to  have appear by his guardian and so the judgement be erroneous as to he and  consequent to the rest because it be a joint judgement roll chief justice this  be a good exception for it be a joint judgement if it be nought in part as  without doubt it be it be nought in the whole and so it be reverse
BODAM and DOWTY bail OF spencer against bridge bail Jones on affirmance of  judgement against the principal pray the bail may render the principal before  any to know facias which the court grant and his render here be a render below  the recognizance be remove and it may be do before any judge in discharge of  the bail but not in execution be error of judgement in the borough of Yarmouth  and in the party election to take he in execution
Boddington against Wootton hill car rot merchant in detinue Br in debt on  obligation conditional to proceed in voyage and return the danger of the sea  except that the defendant pay in twelve calendar month or if the ship be lose  before the return or payment to be void the defendant plead quod ship loss to  be to which the plaintiff demurrer because the meaning of this bill of  adventure be a loss by the danger of the sea not voluntary by the party  therefore the defendant shall show it be by periculum maris but by hale Ch  just it be sufficient pro defendant to pursue the word of the bind and the  plaintiff shall have reply that the ship be lose by the defendant default et  adjornatur
bodily contra iniquity take away equity bodily give bind of pound to the  brother of the defendant condition to pay to the defendant sister party also  to the bill and to maintain a base child pay a certain yearly sum for it there  be no place in the condition where the shall have be pay the plaintiff by his  bill offer payment of the pound and bring it into court and the defendant set  forth by answer that the plaintiff be suitor to her in way of marriage but  abuse her and leave her and thereupon the court refuse to grant a injunction  to the plaintiff against the suit on the bind the plaintiff reply and  acknowledge he be a suitor and real intend marriage but that after he have  begin to woe the woman he be inform as the truth be that she have be former  take in a bed with another man and that this be know public and h er father  trepan he to woe her c he be a young man in Oxford yet now the Lord chancellor  deny the injunction say this court shall not be a court to examine such matter
Bodnam v morgan injunction leave at the defendant house and disobey a  attachment be award Thomas Jones make oath that a writ of injunction be leave  at the house of the defendant and the plaintiff make oath the defendant have  proceed in a suit in the king bench contrary to a injunction therefore a  attachment Bodnam plaintiff Morgan defendant year Elizabeth
BOEVE con Skipwith car f a supplemental bill for a further discovery the bill  be a supplemental bill to have a further discovery from the defendant by way  of evidence for the better clear the matter depend on the account which the  defendant have not answer in the former Cause the plaintiff plead the former  bill to which the defendant answer and the Cause hear and the account direct  this court order the defendant to answer to all matter in this bill not answer  to in the former Cause but the plaintiff not to reply nor to proceed further  chancery report er p
bog vers rise practice it be settle on consideration that when a term notice  of trial be require upon a old issue the notice must be give before the  essoinday and that be a full term Harvey v porter ante contra see Peyton v  Burdus ante
bohun and SPRINGAT Wales in a writ of right protestand in Monmuth to sue in  the nature of a assize army a letter to stand open and do not show how the  protestand be by custom which be void the court be army a letter to stand open  and this proceed by protestand can be without custom therefore it shall be  army a letter to stand open nec non secundum experience but if the patent only  confirm the custom the averment secundum experience be sufficient and  judgement reverse nisi the imparlans be by die act of giving be to the  defendant and not birth predict nor a idem die to the plaintiff the assize be  not take in right of damage all which be ill MackChartess case Keble er report  date MACKCARTE ante pl payment the reservation of the l videlicet quaternatim  and the breach be assign for nonpayment of l videlicet so much quaternatim per  curian without the per equal distribution and the videlicet be to expound the  day and though it differ in the sum its not material and quarterly must be  Keble intend by equal portion to speak ut vulgus as rend of l reserve  quarterly videlicet l at five several day sir William Jones wave this  exception and rely upon the latter exception of the day of Nisiprius in regard  its postea the same day and it can be till afternoon and the court will not  intend it be at any other hour and judgement affirm nisi all party appear  Keble er p
boil v VIVEAN defendant depart without licence a attachment the defendant be  examine upon interrogatory upon the breach of a order of this court and depart  without licence therefore a attachment boil and wife plaintiffs Vivean  defendant year Elizabeth
BOILSTON against Ratliff bankrupt Godbolt pl Noy r in debt to S b joint S  become a bankrupt and the commissioner assign this obligation to b finch for  the plaintiff rely upon the book of h Keble er p that a attachment of such a  debt by the custom of London be good but per Twisden that case fall off upon  the plead but that be forfeitable by one and grantable by one to the king the  assignee of the commissioner must have the same remedy that the bankrupt have  and therefore this or none but per curian this be a penal law and to be take  more strict as to other person then to the bankrupt himself and by Windham the  king tenant in common shall present every tourn contra of a common person as  assignee of commissioner of it for the bankruptcie of the patentee per Twisden  one may have debt by special Act of parliament upon a joint obligation  Adjornatur
bois against bois ante slander thou art a whore and I will throw you out of  your live per quod she be likely to lose her widow estate in a manor whereof  the defendant know the custom per curian be actionable the word be couple to  the intent judgement for the plaintiff but it appear the word be speak at  several time at one that she be a whore and a brazenfaced whore only and after  the word above allege and entire damage which per curian be ill whore alone be  not actionable Adjornatur
Bois against Bois whore speak of a woman who hold land while sole and chaste  SC I side keb case for call a widow who hold a estate while sole and chaste  whore false and malicious with intent to oust her of her estate and say he  will oust her thereof and at another time call her whore after verdict for the  plaintiff on the issue not guilty it be move in arrest of judgement that no  special damage be lie the wordswere not actionable but by the court they  import damage in themselves in this case in respect of ber estate as for call  a man thief a action lie without special damage because the word import it in  themselves but for the last word speak at another time which be not actionable  in themselves and the damage be entire the judgement be therefore stay till  the matter be examine whether the damage be give entire or not for on the back  of the writ where the damage be enter there seem to have be some alteration
Bois against Cranfield mich bane sup rot Q debt upon diverse obligation by a  execution Bois as executor to another bring a action of debt upon diverse  obligation make to his testator the defendant plead that he do pay a lesser  sum than be express in the obligation to the testator during his life and that  he do accept thereof in full satisfaction of the say obligation to this plea  the plaintiff demurrer roll chief justice upon open the matter say that the  question here be whether the payment or the acceptance of the money pay in  satisfaction be to be traverse and be hold it be indifferent to traverse  either of they but he say it be more proper to join issue upon the payment but  the court will advice it be then also say that if one pay money in  satisfaction of a obligation and the party to who it be pay say that he will  receive it for another cause yet if he receive it it shall be judge to be pay  in satisfaction of the obligation for he must receive it Pon such term as the  other will pay it
Bois against NORLIFFE matter which prove the writ abateable not assignable for  error but matter which prove it abate be SC I side keb stram error of  judgement in ejectment assign that the plaintiff after verdict and before  judgement enter and it be argue by Weston that it be not assignable for  nothing be assignable which prove the writ abateable but only that which prove  it abate and cite h e cro Bulst whereto Jones answer that that be true where  the party have time to plead it but that he have not here after verdict but by  the court it be not assignable for the reason give by Weston and they affirm  the judgement
bois against roswell and dickens in chancery a deed of trust to pay the profit  to three in equal manner and to convey the inheritance to they in like sort  make a tenancy in common of the whole so as in a will dickens seize in fee  feoff roswell in trust for himself for life and afterward to pay the profit to  John Robert and Nicholas dickens in ratable and equal manner and also when  they shall come to the age of twentyone year in like sort to convey the  premise to they and their heir John die leave Susan his sister and heir in the  life of the feoff Susan marry Bois and have issue the plaintiff Bois and die  Nicholas die without issue leave Robert his brother and heir Bois exhibit his  bill to have a account of the three part of the profit and also to have the  three part of the inheritance convey to he Robert dickens the defendant claim  the whole and the only question be if this trust be a jointtenancy and so  shall survive whole to Robert or a tenancy ill common so that the three part  shall go to the heir of John and it be decree by Bridgman Lord keeper assist  by the levinz er p judge Rainsford and Moreton that it be a tenancy in common  and that as well for the inheritance as for the profit and as well in case of  a deed of trust as in a will in both which the intent be to be consider and  the inheritance here be to be convey in like sort as the profit and that be in  a ratable and equal manner which in a will will make a tenancy in common
BOISLOE versus baily mich Ann Mod case salk in trespass for assault battery  and wound the defendant as to the way arms plead not guilty and as to the  residue plead a submission to a award of all holt KB er p controversy and set  forth the award make videlicet that the defendant shall provide such a  entertainment for the plaintiff and his friend on such a day in satisfaction  of the say trespass and aver that he do provide it c among other exception it  be here object that there be no venue lie where the thing be provide only at  the defendant house in old bedlam and in London the venue ought to be lie in  the ware or in a parish at least which be in nature of a will in a county holt  c j the want of a venue be only Curable by such plea as admit the fact for  which it be necessary to lie the venue as if debt be upon bind and no venue  lie where the bind be make if demurrer be to it it will be ill but if the  defendant plead a release whereby the bind be admit that help the declaration  though in this case by reason of the frivolousness of the action the court  give no judgement but advice the party to compromise the matter per cur if a  man sign a lease in one county or will of land in another yet the jury must  come from the place where the land be in a ejectment upon such lease for that  be the right venue but that fault be cure after verdict by the statute of  Oxford
BOISSIER v versus the London assurance company where the same policy of  insurance be repeat in a second count rule for oyer of two policy deny  matthews in a action of debt upon the policy of insurance move that defendant  may have oyer of two policy of insurance whereupon the plaintiff declare  draper for plaintiff that he offer they oyer of one policy which be all his  cause of action for though there be two policy in the declaration one of they  be only lie over again in another manner Lord Hardwicke c j sure you be very  fond of special plead since the Act allow you to plead nil debet in action on  your policy case tempt Hardwicke but this be no more than two count for the  same debt
BOITURE Xer WOOLRICIK in trespass for a assault battery and wound and for  disturb plaintiff in his quiet possession if the defendant plead the general  issue and the damage be under S the plaintiff shall have no more cost than  damage in a action of trespass quare enclosed space to break in pieces of  assault battery wound and of disturbance of he in his quiet possession c upon  not guilty plead a general verdict be give for the plaintiff and damage under  S and Mr Branthwaite move to have full cost because the defendant be find  guilty of a wound and disturbance of the quiet possession but per holt chief  justice the practice have be always otherwise and he say that he do not  remember such a motion to have be make but gold justice say that he move such  a motion as to the peaceable possession here in the king bench but it be deny  he and the motion here be deny memorandum Saturday the twentyseventh of April  in this term the earl of jersey one of the secretary of state by command of  the king take away the great seal from the Lord summer and the seal be not  dispose of until Sunday the five of may at which time it be deliver by  commission to the Lord chief justice holt the master of the roll the Lord  chief justice Treby and the Lord chief baron ware and Thursday the twentyfirst  Lord Raymond of may Mr secretary Vernon come and take away by command of the  king the great seal from the commissioner and the king in Council deliver it  to sir Nathan wright one of his sergeant with the title of keeper of the great  seal c
bokenham against bokenham December defective conveyance by tenant in tail  supply Edmund bokenham the plaintiff great grandfather make a settlement of  diverse land and manor inter all Stockmash which estate descend to sir Henry  his son in tail sir Henry in consideration of a marriage to he have between  wiseman his son and grace Davies make a deed of feoff to the use of himself  for life the remainder to wiseman for life the remainder to the first second  and other son by grace this deed be endorse general livery make to J S appoint  case in chancery by Paul daw the feoff thereto the marriage take effect  wiseman and grace have issue Henry Walsingham Paul the plaintiff and Hugh the  defendant and six other son sir Henry after levy a fine to Walsingham then his  old son and this be to the use of sir Henry and his heir Walsingham die and he  convey the manor and signiory to the defendant the four S n of Stockmash only  and die the defendant enter suppose that livery be not well give because the  letter of attorney to take livery be lose as he suppose Lord keeper decree  that the letter of attorney shall be supply and livery admit though it be  object that this be in effect to decree a discontinuance which be a wrong and  a unlawful Act and that it be d to assist a remainder man in tail in a three  remainder for he be the three son against a legal fine of his father tenant in  tail and who fine be a bar to he in Jaw and also against the acceptance of the  fine by Walsingham who join with sir Henry who have power by the recovery to  have bar the estate of the plaintiff but to this last the Lord keeper say the  grandfather may have the conveyance make by himself in his own hand and it be  apparent so for he recite in that deed that he be tenant in tail and he recite  not the feoff make by himself case in chancery er p
bokenham and thomson trover trover de to visit rebus aid after verdict per  curian in error of judgement in assumpsit in c b
bolas against HENSTOCKE ante trespass in trespass the defendant justify by  lease of Vernon and that the cattle be damage pheasant the plaintiff reply by  former lease of a close adjoin and that by custom in the say will use all the  occupier of the defendant land use to repair against the plaintiff land after  verdict judgement be arrest because the custom be extinct by unity and void in  it self but on Cr William pro plaintiff pray Keble judgement the prescription  be find albeit it be void or extinct by unity as dyer Sury and Pigot James  Ingraham and Berclays case in c b rot that the lessee under unity shall repair  as the prescription be before but per curian the verdict aid nothing either on  the void custom or on the extingment by unity both which make the  justification void be continue albeit as a prescription some hold it void some  good and judgement stay
bold against welter in a replevin and the title be by lease make by a parson  and the avowry be that a be seize of the rectory of h and make the lease  without show that he be parson and by the court that that shall have be a good  exception if it have not be say in the avowry moreover that a be seize in jure  church which supply all
bold and rice in b r executor in a know fa with enquiry of asset and waste  find and return to which the defendant plead a former judgement ultra quod c  so plene to manage to which the plaintiff demurrer especial because the waste  be not traverse which be the point of the enquisition per curian it ought to  be traverse albeit on a know fa on a judgement plene to manage be a good plea  without traverse of Keble the suppose waste in the count but here the waste be  return otherwise say adjornatur Keble er p
bold v warren levinz er report date mole against wallis or bold against warren  matter plead as at commonlaw can be maintain by a custom SC raym covenant on a  indenture of apprenticeship to serve he seven year which he have not do but  depart the defendant plead infancy the plaintiff reply the custom of London  for infant to bind themselves apprentice the defendant demurrer and whether  this be a departure be the question and Wyndham and foster chief justice at  one time seem that it be not it be lie in London where the custom be know and  foster cite a case where infancy be plead to a feoff the plaintiff reply the  custom of gavelkind in ken that a infant may make a levinz er p feoff at  fifteen and the action be lie in ken it be resolve to be good Twysden and  Mallett on the contrary say that which be plead general as the commonlaw can  be maintain by a custom but be a departure and cite Yel Plowd Com mich h pl  hill h pl cro hut but they agree that if one plead a statute and the other say  that it be repeal the other may say that it be revive by another statute or if  a man plead a statute and the other say that it be to continue but till such a  time which be expire the other may say that the first statute be afterward  make perpetual because it be only a fortify of the first matter and in Hillary  term follow the party plaintiff pray leave to discontinue
BOLDEROW and another against futter the dedimus power to make attorney be test  after the return of the writ of entry in a common recovery be error for the  judgement have relation to that return a common recovery be suffer last term  by Bolderow and wiseman against futter of the manor of Bresingham in the  county of Norfolk to the use of sir Nicholas Bacon keeper of the great seal in  which a error be discover by Lennard custos narrow places in this namely that  the original writ of entry be returnable on the octave of saint Michael which  be the that day of October and the dedimus power de attorney faciend for  futter bear date the that day of October and the mittimus of it into the bench  bear date the that day of October which be after the relation of the judgement  which be on the octave of saint Michael although the entry be that afterward  in this same term the demandant come and the tenant though solemnly call come  not but make default therefore c for so it shall be although the writ be  returnable the last day of the term for the dyer afterward in this same term  may be the same day that the count and defence be make and then in the case  above the warrant of attorney be make after judgement give contrary to the  supposal of the writ of dedimus power which be whereas our writ pend before  our justice c because a writ be not pen after judgement give and so the  recovery above be hold erroneous per curian easter term queen Elizabeth
BOLDISER and NEWENS what shall be say to be a good assignment of a bail bind  on motion to stay proceed against the sheriff of London the counsel say that  the plaintiff have take a assignment of the bailbond and therefore the proceed  be irregular but it be observe of the other side that this assignment be void  in itself because the statute require that it shall be attest by the sheriff  and Brocas and levet be both sheriff for this year and yet it be attest per  ricardum Brocas ricardum Brocas which be wrong beside too the plaintiff  counsel say the same statute require that the assignment shall have two  witness to it now in this case after the witness have put their name to it the  mistake in the attestation be raze out and the name levet put in so that now  they say the right assignment be never witness at all and therefore it be  wrong too upon that account accord the court allow the plaintiff to go on in  his proceed Barnardiston king b er p
BOLDROE and more presentation it be say the king be by dissolution of abbey  and sound of the bishopric of Ely the founder ordain by bylaw that as often as  any prebend of the chapter become vacant by session surrender death or any  other way whatsoever that the bishop shall present and dr Spencer be on death  of the dean make dean by the king the bishop present dr Boldroe and finch Lord  chancellor send a ne to send to to the dean and chapter for more suppose the  prebendary to be vacant by the king promotion of Spencer and so this belong to  the king to present the prebend the bylaw be intend of ordinary Keble session  or otherwise vacant by act of the party not where vacancy be by the king act  as grant of all fine extend not to fine royal c and so it be conceive but sub  judge lie be and the bishop do admit c
bolls against lassel Intr h Elizabeth b r rot the sheriff arrest a upon a keep  hiding oneself and return a to take in hand have take surety for his  appearance the party do not appear and upon that process issue to bring in the  arty and upon that the sheriff return faint c where in truth a be at large and  yet it be hold a good return although that no such return be ever see before  and although also that he may have return that he have let he at large upon  bail for otherwise a mischief will come to the sheriff for he be compellable  to pay he and if the party do not appear the sheriff shall be amerce and be  himself shall be relieve upon his bind and no action upon the case against he  upon that return and upon that the justice intend to enter quod to express  grief nothing to take in hand per bill and will note p Elizabeth b r rot  Spencer a action upon the case as also because after a to take in hand return  and to the habeas corpus the sheriff return faint where in truth the party be  at large without bail and judgement be give for the plaintiff but otherwise if  the sheriff have let he at large upon bail and so judgement be give h  Elizabeth b r
bolls against NYSEHAM mich Elizabeth rot debt for rend against the devise of a  termor and demurrer saint because plaintiff do not show the executor and that  defendant enter with their consent dly for not say express that they enter by  virtue of the devise in debt the plaintiff declare that he be seize in fee of  certain land and by indenture lease they to one a b for a term of year render  rend whereby the lessee become possess and be so possess make his will a at c  and by the say will will and bequeathe the whole term and his interest  aforesaid to the defendant and die after who death the defendant enter and  become possess thereof and for the rend arrear after the death he bring the  action of debt and do not show in certain that the lessee make any executor  nor that the defendant enter by the assent and licence of the executor and for  this cause the defendant demurrer in law to the declaration also for that the  defendant do not say express S whereby or by virtue of which bequest c he  enter c although he have the word possess yet it may be he enter after the  death of the testator by force of another title and so shall it be the rather  intend and then if the defendant be in of another estate or title than as  assignee of the lessee this action of debt do not lie against he for want of  privity wherefore c
bolls against sip henry winton m for natural affection to his son covenant to  stand seize to the use of his son for life and after his death to such a woman  as he shall marry for her life the remainder to d in tail and before that the  son have marry a lease that land for a hundred year to l S the son marry S and  die she enter upon I S and lease to b who be oust bring a ejection firm that  it be a go d consideration to raise a use to her that shall be the wife of the  son we Plo that a lease for year by the covenanter to I S do not hinder the  raise of Noy er p the use contingent we die but otherwise it have be if the  covenanter by the same deed have raise a power to himself to make lease for  year but in our case the lease for year take effect as a future interest out  of the fee that be in the covenanter after the estate determine and at the  worst the feme shall have the reversion and rend during her life and William  vouch Ralph Egertons case where it be judge accord and now judgement for the  plaintiff
bolter against fourd and harris Siderf pl joinder march pl style pl Gr pl c  style pl in a action of covenant against two joint on covenant make joint and  several if the plaintiff have judgement against one by default and be bar  against the other Tilly against Woodill on plea plead he be bar as to both by  Allen and so in all action where of necessity they must be join as in debt or  detinue contra in trespass or the like and though the labour to build the  house be several yet the matter be contain in a deed be joint but when the  joinder be only on fault as two join in service of I S if one do not the  plaintiff may recover against he alone by foster as this case be the one  defendant have plead covenant perform and find for he here it appear the  plaintiff have no cause of action against any which the court agree also the  defendant pray cost against the plaintiff there be here a nil to take in hand  per billam award by the statute which the court grant also in a writ of  conspiracy against two one Keble er p confess the other plead and its find he  do not conspire which be find for he both be hereby discharge which the court  and bar agree and so in this case judgement for the defendant
bolter contra chester all car foe bail to answer no more than what be express  in the ac etian bill the question be whether the plaintiff bolter who be a  surety for one ree shall pay any more than the sum of pound for which he be  bail for the a of one Roger ree at the defendant suit the ac etian bill be  only for pound whereas the defendant demand pound for a year rend for the  premise and pound damage for want of repair of the premise beside cost and  will fix the same on the plaintiff the bail but the main question be whether  the bail ought to answer or pay any more than what be express in the Writ  which be pound or whether he ought to answer or pay what may have be recover  in case the say ree for who the plaintiff be bail have appear and defend the  action this court conceive that the defendant Stretton ought to have no more  than what be express in the Writ and ac etian bill for which the plaintiff be  only bail but his cost in the same already tax at law and by the master and  order the same accord
bolton against arm June S c Chan Rep a judgement for a matter discharge by Act  of oblivion decree to be vacate a lessee of the crown make a Underlease of a  rend during the usurpation the state void the first lessee estate and expose  the crown interest to sale the UnderLessee apply to his lessor for protection  he bid he shift for himself thereupon the UnderLessee pay his rend to the  purchaser from the state for some time and after the UnderLessee purchase his  tenement from he that purchase of the state upon the king restauration the  first lessee bring debt against his UnderLessee for the arrear of rend from  the time he discontinue payment to he and have judgement by default the  UnderLessee pray case in chancery to be relieve against this judgement which  be by the bill allege to be bySurprize though no surprise appear in obtain the  judgement decree that the judgement be vacate for that the rend be discharge  by the Act of oblivion of which the Lord chancellor say a court of equity be  as proper a judge or interpreter as the judge at law
bolton against bolton prohibition Jones show letter of remission of the court  under seal of the chancellor of Worcester where the cause begin pray a rule  for prohibition may be discharge in to be near sevitiam which be remove into  the arch and for this cause without put the party to plead it the court  discharge the rule for prohibition grant nisi before on suggestion of citation  out of the diocese simile Lord rosses case a consultation be grant on bare  suggestion of the letter without plead Keble er p
bolton against bolton rot tenant for life be implead do pray in aid of he in  the reversion who join and lose c and the tenant for life bring a writ of  error and the record be remove and be in the remainder bring a writ of error  also de think over quod in person thou to sit back and the question be upon  which writ of error the judgement shall Owen er p be reverse and it be object  that if it shall be reverse by the tenant for life that be in the remainder  shall be restore but gawdy Fenner and Clench wear down who hold that it shall  be reverse at his suit who first bring the writ as in case of interpleader it  shall be always upon the first writ and notwithstanding the remove of the  record by the tenant for life at the next term the court say it be at their  discretion to reverse this at suit of any of the party as they please and  because they observe some indirect practice by he in the remainder it be  reverse at suit of tenant for life pasch jacob
bolton and lee covenant in covenant by the master of a ship against the  defendant bind as one of the affraiters the dawn who the defendant demurrer to  the declaration and allege the action ought to be against all the fraiters  send non allocatur for unless there be three part tripartite the dawn who be  good enough as well as jointly and separately but if there be three part it be  doubtful it be except on Cr adderton Dunsters case that the sum be miscast too  little then be due for time send non allocatur for whether it be too much or  too little its amendable and its not like debt which if allege less than in  truth it be not show the rest be satisfy be ill and do amendable but though  the court doubt not that in covenant that the allege less then due be well yet  adjornatur to see the variance and on special demurrer for variance per curian  the particular ought to be show wherein that party may amend Keble er p
bolton and thomson trespass on motion of Thomson for a new trial in trespass  of brick break in a wall or that the defendant may have liberty to plead  special that this be the freehold of the Lord of Derby and that be as servant  break c but by hale chief justice and Twisden this be sufficient evidence on  not guilty and need not be plead no more by the servant of a stranger than by  the servant of the owner of the wall but a new trial be award for excessive  damage
bolton case ordinary Coleman pray a prohibition to the commissary and official  of buck on car cap be cite to answer to article on oath that he have not be at  church nor take the sacrament c and that they refuse any plea Keble against it  and per curian a prohibition be grant quoad the oath as to those article nisi  the same in the case of Hardin ex motion bigland the same for bowyer ex motion  levins
bolton contra whether July car Lord chancellor master of the roll SC I Chan c  a judgement for a matter discharge by the Act of oblivion vacate a leasee of  the crown make a UnderLease at a rend during the usurpation the state avoid  the first lessee estate and expose the crown be interest io sale the  UnderLessee apply to the lessor for protection he bid he shift for himself the  UnderLessee pay his rend to the purchaser from the state for some time and  after the UnderLessee purchase his tenement from he that purchase from the  state upon the king restoration the first lessee bring debt against his  UnderLessee for the arrear of rend from the time he discontinue payment to he  and have judgement by default and now to be relieve against the judgement  which chancery report be by the bill allege to be by surprise though no  surprise appear the UnderLessee bring his bill in equity though no surprise be  apprehend in obtain the judgement and decree that the judgement be vacate for  that the rend be discharge by the Act of oblivion of which the Lord chancellor  say a court of equity be as proper a interpreter as the judge at law
bolton versus cannon keb Pollexf in debt against a executor for rend arrear in  his own time in the debet to hold off the defendant plead that the rend be  more worth than the land and that be tender a surrender before the time for  which the rend be demand and that the plaintiff refuse to accept the surrender  and that he have full administer and so demand judgement of the action the  plaintiff reply that there be rend arrear to he and that therefore he be not  bind to accept of the surrender and to this the defendant demurrer the court  say Ventris er p first that a executor that do intermeddle can waive a lease  or any other part of the testator estate for he can assume the executorship  for part and refuse for part second that in case the land be not more worth  than the rend it be a good plea to a action of debt in the debet to hold off  for he be to be charge in the to hold off only though where for rend be of  less value he may be charge in the debet to hold off Ventris for that which be  accrue in his own time accord to hargrave case   three the doubt here be that  the defendant have waive the material part of his plea videlicet that the rend  exceed the value of the land and rely upon his tender of a surrender which be  nothing to the purpose whether judgement can be here for he and that otherwise  his plea be double but because the plaintiff have not demurrer to that but  answer only to one part of it the defendant may well demurrer upon the  replication because it do not answer all contain in the plea for unless the  party demurrer for doubleness he be bind to answer all the matter allege et  adjornatur but be this term move again judgement be give for the plaintiff  because the defendant relinquish the material part of his back and offer  matter mere frivolous
bolus against HINSTOCKE trespass in trespass of take and impound cattle the  defendant justify by lease of Vernon for year if he so long live and that the  cattle be damage pheasant in Cowleso the plaintiff by replication confess the  seize and lease of Vernon but say he be seize of boomer in poplo a contiguous  close and that by custom of poplo the tenant and occupier of Cowleso amend the  fence between and that the fence be out of repair and that the cattle escape  so if any trespass it be of the defendant own wrong Baldwin move in arrest of  judgement after verdict pro plaintiff that the custom be extinct by unity in  Vernon so it be not like a prescription that all occupier have use to repair  which be ill also Cr baker and Cr Holbage and Warner and dyer be the very case  in question also the verdict on the custom aid not in regard it appear there  can be no such custom and James cite Poph Pigot and Sury it will be void by  prescription and so it be by way of custom for as   Boylstons case  prescription be in person and custom in thing l   and fence be not of  necessity so can be revive the court conceive the custom must reach the whole  will and not the land of a particular person but it must be lie as a  prescription where there be no imbecility in the person as in copiholder but  for easement the inhabitant Keble that can prescribe may allege it by way of  custom also if it may be allege by custom yet not in occupier but in tenant  albeit some late opinion have be contra though occupier may lie a customer yet  this be now go by unity have always no existence in the hand of Vernon the  verdict will not aid this judgement stay post Keble er p
bolus versus HINSTORKE extinguishment Danv Abr p vent keb trespass for break  his close and take and impound the plaintiff ox the defendant plead that sir  Henry Vernon be seize in fee of the close call the Raymond sir t er p low  leasow in Peplow be the place where the take be suppose and he be so seize  demise the same such a day to the defendant for ninetynine year determinable  upon three life by virtue whereof he enter and be thereof possess and justify  take the beast damagefeasant and impound they the plaintiff reply and confess  the seize of sir Henry Vernon and the lease to the defendant but he far say  that sir Henry Vernon be also seize of another close call Bowns adjoin to  LowLeasow close and that there be and have be time out of mind a custom in  Peplow that the occupier of LowLeasow close ought to repair the fence between  the say close and that the say fence be out of repair and that the cattle go  into the defendant close pro diminution sepium the defendant take issue upon  the custom and a verdict for the plaintiff and sergeant Baldwin move for the  defendant in arrest of judgement that the replication be not good because the  custom if good be extinguish by the unity of possession in Vernon admit it not  extinguish yet that custom lie in occupier be not good but it ought to be lie  in they who have the inheritance I cro baker versus Brereman Twisden justice  interrupt and say that point have be adjudge both way as to the unity of  possession it do extinguish the prescription dyer b pi and by Twisden and  Morton justice the prescription be go by the unity but it be adjourn and stay  c
BONDLESS against Griffith and Norwood c cinque port sir Edward turner demand  cognizance on behalf of the duke of York in ejectment of land in the cinque  port before any other imparlance then be common use on the new rule in  ejectment which be only the clerk entry and the party can come in to plead the  court order entry of it with special imparlance friends are living omnibus c  and that accord to the warrant show to the court he plead his patent with the  special roll of the court but they will not grant cognizance on his motion  only because Windham doubt their power be only rashly placita
boner vers juner coparceners may join in ejectment it be rule by holt chief  justice at rigate in Surrey summer assize will upon evidence at a trial that  coparceners may join in ejectment and by he the case in more n be not law
Bonham contra Newcombe ux January the former decree ut above pronounce to be  reverse by the Lord keeper north on precedent cite and long debate but order  to suspend c and he will hear the Cause ab origin he dislike also the entry of  the decree videlicet recite the bill and answer and read the proof and hear  counsel decree it a mortgage and therefore not state the point of fact  videlicet that it appear thus or thus c and so he do late in the case of the  countess of Anglesey
Bonham versus Newcomb Q before vide n Chan Rep see the d of Norfolk case in  Chan can one be seize in fee in consideration of l pay to he by a person that  marry his kinswoman convey to he and his heir and take a redemise for year if  he shall live so long and a covenant therein that if he shall pay l with the  interest that shall be due for the same at any time during his life that the  grantee shall reconvey to he and his heir and that if he do not pay the money  then that his heir c shall have no power to redeem he die the money not be pay  and his heir prefer a bill to redeem it Ventris and it be urge for he that in  a conveyance which be a security for money whatever covenant there be therein  to exclude from redemption such covenant will not be regard in this court and  that the person to who the conveyance be make may have have a bill in the  lifetime of he that convey to have a time set for the payment of the money or  otherwise to be foreclose but my Lord keeper dismiss the bill for be say in a  common mortgage such covenant to restrain redemption shall not be regard but  this be make with a intention of a settlement of his estate beside the  consideration of the money pay and he deny that be can have be by the degree  of this court limit to any time for payment of the money for this court can  shorten the time that be give by express covenant and agreement of the party  but when that time be pass then the practice be to foreclose notam this  dismission be afterward in the parliament hold W m affirm notam if a man make  a voluntary conveyance and there be a defect in it so as it can operate at law  this court will not decree a execution thereof but sometime it have be decree  where it be intend a provision for young child Ventris er p
BONITHON against Kendal slander she be the woman that have a base child and  that it be at l and a redheaded boy after verdict without special damage not  actionable per curian without allege it be likely to be a charge to the parish  Keble er p
bonner versus hill mich W rot Carthew this be a action on several promise c  the defendant plead in abatement a frivolous plea videlicet that the plaintiff  have implead he in the court of common plea pro eaden causan act the plaintiff  reply nul tiel record in the court of common plea and conclude his replication  in bar videlicet unde petit judgment financial loss svan c and upon a demurrer  to this replication it be insist that the action be discontinue and the case  of biss and Harcourt be cite as a authority in point holt c j this case differ  from that because here the plea be ill and the judgement in this case be upon  the insufficiency of the plea but in that case thew plea be good and the  judgement be upon the replication for that the plaintiff have thereby pray a  wrong judgement if matter of fact be plead in abatement triable per pais the  plaintiff may conclude his replication in bar because final judgement be to be  give after a verdict in that case the rule be that the defendant answer over
bonner versus hill to go into mich will b r rot Danv p where a replication be  well conclude in bar comb this be a action on several promise c the defendant  plead in abatement a frivolous plea videlicet that the plaintiff have implead  he in the court of common plea pro eaden causan act the plaintiff reply nul  tiel record in the court of common plea and conclude his replication in bar  videlicet unde petit judgment financial loss svan c and upon a demurrer to  this replication it be insist that the action be discontinue and the case of  biss and Harcourt be cite as a authority in point say per holt Ch justice this  case differ from that because here the plea be ill and the judgement in this  case be upon the insufficiency of the plea but in that case the plea be good  and the judgement be upon the replication for that the plaintiff have thereby  pray a wrong judgement and he say that if matter of fact be plead in abatement  triable per pais the plaintiff may conclude his replication in bar because  final judgement be to be give after a verdict in that case therefore the rule  be that the defendant answer over
bonner versus underwood mich Ann debt in the debet to hold off against a  administrator on a devastavit and he plead that after the say judgement debt  be bring in the debet to hold off against the defendant upon a judgement have  against he as administrator and suggest a devastavit commit by he holt KB the  defendant plead that the plaintiff sue against he as administrator and obtain  judgement and that afterward and before this action bring the administration  commit be repeal and commit to one law to who he pay the residue of the good  of the intestate have first satisfy himself of l which the intestate owe the  defendant for wage the court take exception to this plead because the  defendant do not traverse the devastavit for without waste the defendant can  not be charge in the debet to hold off and this be the usual way of declare  since the car Wheatle v lane sand lev so they desire sergeant hall to take  time to consider of it for the gist of the action be the waste which you shall  traverse but if the fact be with you perhaps we may allow you to amend your  plea upon payment of cost therefore you do well to consider of it admiralty
BONVILL v BONVILL the defendant commit to the fleet for a rescue bring a  action for a false return Richard champion a commissioner in a commission of  rebellion return a rescue against guy Bonvill who be examine and his  examination refer to two master of t court be find to have confess the rescue  whereupon he be commit to the fleet and yet afterward bring his action upon  the case at the commonlaw against the say champion for his false return order  that a subpoena be award against the say guy Bonvill to show cause why a  injunction caryi er p shall not be award against he for stay of his action  upon the case caryi but afterward videlicet Elizabeth the defendant be allow  to go forward in his action upon the case at the commonlaw because either of  the party there may plead his matter Joan Bonvill widow plaintiff Bonvill and  mary Billinghay defendant year Elizabeth
Bonville against pain g tenant in tail before h make a gift in tail to a  remainder to his own right heir the donee enter and die lean his wife enceint  g s son enter after the statute whether he shall be remit or may all be issue  when bear enter upon he queen tenant in tail make a ferment and die and a gift  in tail be make by the discontinue remainder to the issue in the first tail in  fee the second tenant in tail die without issue his wife privity easy with a  son the issue of the first tail enter and then the other issue be bear and  enter upon he and he bring assize and not maintainable Plowd and grandfather  father and son grandfather tenant in tail before the statute h c make a  discontinuance in fee to the use of himself for life and after his death to  the use of a stranger in tail and for default of such issue to his own right  heir and then die and afterward the father die before the statute and after  the statute the stranger die seize of the estate tail execute by the statute  without issue his wife be privity enceint wherefore the son as right heir to  the grandfather enter and afterward the issue in ventre sa mere be bear  whether he can reenter upon the son or whether the son be remit or not and  quaere whether he be remit because by the statute he be the first person in  who any remainder in possession vest and this be of a feesimple of which  estate necessary by the statute he must be deem in wherefore c
boom against leech ante roll thou art a trayterly rogue imply no act and so  not actionable by Allen no more then to say you be incline to be a traitor in  error of judgement in c b curian contra that it imply a act and be all one  with traitorous rogue which be adjudge actionable Cr ware against thorn  judgement for the plaintiff nisi
boom against leech Siderf pl slander I roll thou art a trayterly rogue say of  a justice the court conceive actionable as bankruptly knave or of a attorney  that he be a knavish attorney be actionable so to say h be a cheat or bribe  knave c but by Allen these refer to the profession not so here Adjornatur
boom versus SANCTRY year car the plaintiff be indebt to the defendant by bind  and one brown be indebt to the plaintiff brown give a judgement to the  defendant for the debt which be owe to he by the plaintiff and the former bind  be deliver up and a new bind give by the plaintiff that he will pay the money  if brown do not afterward the defendant promise the plaintiff that if at his  own charge he will extend brown land he will deliver up the new bind and it be  prove that be do make such a promise and that he do at his own charge extend  the land the bind be order to be deliver up though the extent will not satisfy  the debt and brown become insolvent
boomer against cleve Trin banc sup arrest of judgement in a action upon the  statute of e of hue and cry in this case in arrest of judgement upon a verdict  give for the plaintiff in a action upon the stat of winch e of hue cry the  question be whether the plaintiff in his declaration have misreeited the  statute or not roll chief justice take this difference that if one bring a  action upon a statute and in his declaration misrecite it in word which go to  the ground of the action though there be a verdict in the case yet it be not  help but if the misrecital be in word which do not go to the ground of the  action it be help after verdict by the statute of Jeofails
boomer against lord saint John Thursday Nov fine in discontinuance Br Leond pl  Cr pl m Edward pl in ejectment the plaintiff claim by forfeiture of tenant for  life the plaintiff father on fine levy by he and the plaintiff old brother in  the next remainder in tail be dead without issue upon Cr English and John but  the court conceive that both estate pass to make one blowing as   Bredons case  and that the tenancy for life be not extinct in the remainder in tail especial  there be a precedent deed of bargain and sale enrol after the six month in  salv custodiam which be no bargain and sale but a evidence of the intent not  to forfeit but the party agree see the court opinion and the plaintiff poor
boomer and free hill rot fresh suit the roll be bring into the court on action  upon the case on Edward stat cap of hue and cry recite whereas felony robbery  and burn of house it be except in arrest of judgement that the statute be only  arsons general and not arsons of mesons and so the parliament roll which be  bring into the court appear to be but the print be burn of house wile say he  have see the roll c
boomer and PAYTE Trin car banc Reg demurrer upon a declaration in debt Payte  the administrator of the good and chattel of I S bring a action of debt  against boomer and declare that the intestate bring a action of debt in the  common plea against three and have a judgement against they and a capias ad to  give satisfaction against two of they be direct to boomer the defendant be  then sheriff of the county where the party live to execute and that accord he  do execute it by take the party and afterward do suffer they to escape and for  this the plaintiff bring his action to this declaration the plaintiff demurrer  but roll justice say be see no cause for it for a administrator may have a  action of debt against a sheriff upon a escape suffer of a prisoner of the  intestate in his life time and order the defendant to show cause Tuesday next  why the plaintiff shall not have judgement
boon against shears hill ba Reg Trin car rot demurrer to a plea boon bring a  action of debt upon a obligation of l against shears and declare that the  condition of the obligation be that the defendant shall make such a voyage  with a ship and pay certain money at his return and other condition mention  and for not perform the condition he bring his action the defendant plead in  bar that the ship be take in the voyage per man bellicosos and demand  judgement of the action to this plea the plaintiff demurrer and show for cause  that the plea do not give answer to all the declaration yard of council with  the defendant say the plea be good for the plea answer the whole condition of  the bind which be first to make the voyage with the ship and then at his  return to perform the other condition and be hinder in the one he be not bind  to perform the other Bacon justice let we see a book to consider of
boon v Collingwood July ne exeat royal power till answer and further order the  defendant have put in his answer he apply to discharge the writ which be order  on his give security to abide the event of the cause Mews dig ne exeat royal  power
boon v the Fordwich bottomry bind pronounce for ad et ass bk that may the  judge pronounce the sum of pound S d to be due to Charles boon esquire for the  principal and risk of the money advance by he accord to the bottomry bind give  he by John Barnard late master of the ship Fordwich and condemned Holmans  client in expense
BOOREMANS case Booreman be a barrister of one of the temple and be expel the  house and his chamber seize for nonpayment of his commons whereupon he by  Newdigate pray his writ of restitution and bring the writ in court ready frame  which be direct to the bencher of the say society but it be deny by the court  because there be none in the inn of court to who the writ can be direct  because it be no body corporate but only a voluntary society and submission to  government and they be angry with he for it that he have waive the ancient and  usual way of redress for any grievance in the inn of court which be by appeal  to the judge and will have he do so now
boot and graham what shall not be say to be a good demand of conusance this  matter be mention in page and now the court seem to be of opinion that the  affidavit be necessary however this matter do not come full in question but be  prevent in a good measure by a exception take by judge page which make it not  necessary for the court to decide the other question and this be that the  demand of conusance ought to have be enter upon the roll before they come to  apply to have it allow and the whole court be of opinion that this exception  be fatal for they say whenever any thing be suggest in bar of the jurisdiction  of the court it ought to be enter first upon the roll and this they say be  suppose to be do even in suggestion where prohibition be move for but yet the  chief justice say he think it be another question whether they can not allow  the demand of the conusance to be enter nunc pro tunc and then that point fall  into debate but yet the Barnardiston king b court be at last of opinion that  they ought not to allow it for bar to their jurisdiction ought to be strict  pursue and this the court say be the reason why you can make such a  application as this after a imparlance there be another point that be lie down  by sergeant Hawkins in this case and that be that the defendant himself may  have plead this but that the court direct deny and say it have be determine to  the contrary for the statute which give the chancellor power to demand this  conusance make it necessary for he himself to demand it in this way and this  be the reason why this case differ from that of ancient demesne and other case  of the like nature these be the determination the court give in this case and  be guide in they Barnardiston king b er p by the like proceed which they say  be in the case of manner and fern and huit and fern which be case where the  chancellor of Cambridge demand his conusance
boot and Grayham how far person may be sue in the court of westminsterhall  notwithstanding they be member of one of the university the defendant be a  member and resident of the university of Oxford be sue in this court upon a  contract be enter into in London and now the chancellor Barnardiston king b er  p of Oxford come primo die and demand that his plea of conusance may be allow  king Edward the three give the university a distinct jurisdiction by his  charter which be confirm by parliament to hold plea of all matter which a  member and resident of the university be concern in except such as relate to  matter of freehold by which same charter all judge be prohibit to proceed in  any of these cause after the chancellor have put in his claim but now a  exception be take to the manner of this claim put in upon account of the  defendant residence be only certify by the chancellor and not verify by  affidavit the court seem to be of opinion that this exception have a good deal  of weight in it for they say a judge can certify a matter of fact of this sort  which will be final but only matter appear upon record and they say that the  bare be upon the matriculation roll will not be enough in this case but it be  equal Barnardiston king b necessary that such person shall be resident in the  university so upon this exception it stand over to another day
boot and his wife against cooper term Trin how far the court will not allow a  action of debt to be bring upon a judgement pen a writ of error a action of  debt be bring upon a judgement pen a writ of error and yet the defendant bail  have enter into the rule to surrender the party or pay the money if the  judgement shall be affirm upon which Mr thede move to stay the proceed and the  court accord grant it for they say the proceed on in a fresh action be plain  vexatious after this security enter into by the rule because if the judgement  shall be affirm there be immediate remedy against the bail upon the rule and  this be the intent of the rule when it be make in the case of Arthur and mire  but the court refuse to grant cost because the proceed in the action first be  regular
booth against beard amendment after record remove by error the amendment if  any he must be where the record be cost notam the lessor of the plaintiff by  several rule of court on demand ought to pay cost upon the insufficiency or  skulk of the plaintiff in ejectment
booth against beard ante error it be certify by the clerk that a original file  after imparlance in c b and judgement give be good enough and it shall be  intend the suit be begin de to make new contra where there never be but one  original that be so enter and show the reason thereof which the court will not  allow till conference with the judge there
booth against beard ante February amendment original in a term after  imparlance by wile by the course of c b be well enough after judgement and it  shall be intend that the party appear de to make new which by Twisden be  against law upon nil to say or non sum shape contra in judgement by confession  which may be the same term but in the other case he must have time to plead  and this be but to shore up a judgement which appear on the record certify in  tanner against bachelor upon diminution allege after judgement remove in want  of a original and roll be of this opinion and the court conceive it to be  against law and will not rule it one way or other till further advisement  Adjornatur
booth against franklin booth farmor of a portion of tithe for year without  deed demise a farm which he have in the same parish to franklin for year and  afterward he libel against he for tithe of that farm and franklin say he be  not farmour and henden pray a prohibition for that first that the lease for  tithe be without deed but he may be discharge of his own tithe without deed as  be adjudge before in this court second the lessee be not to pay tithe for that  farm for although the parson make a lease of the glebe for year be pay tithe  but if a layman who have the impropriation lease the glebe the lessee do not  pay tithe but the court deny the case of the lease of the parsonage  impropriate and say that the case of Perkins and hind be adjudge to the  contrary in that very point and also if be purchase other land in the parish  which be discharge of tithe in his hand and be demise they yet the lessee pay  he tithe and the opinion of the court be it one contract with the parson for  discharge of the tithe of his land for year and demise his land to another yet  be shall not have tithe but the discharge run with the land but if one take a  lease of his tithe by deed and make a demise of his land he have tithe of the  lessee and the direction be that the lessee of the farm ought to show express  in the ecclesiastical court that the farmour have not a lease by deed and a  hetley er p prohibition be grant and it shall be admit that the word of the  libel be firmato conductor to take into possession be good
booth against leech word traitorly rogue SC I side keb error of a judgement in  the common plea in case for these word thou art a traitorly rogue where the  word be adjudge not actionable because adverbial speak as thievish rogue  because it signify no more than a inclination to thieve but by Alleyn  bankruptly knave have be adjudge actionable and by the court the word seem  actionable as cro ware against thorn traitorous knave be adjudge actionable
booth against Northrop and STRENTER his bail bail note as a course of the  court that the render of the principal to prison be no discharge of the bail  till the hairpiece which remain with the secondary be discharge although the  mark thereof be but to the intent that all party may have notice and here it  be agree d all bad notice but yet the band of the judge be but a warrant to  the secondary to enter the hairpiece on record which be do on the plearoll  also and till actual entry be but a escrow and not pleadable as any To give  back see which the bail must procure and the actual render be not sufficient  yet the court restore money take of the bail in execution against he after  such render
booth con Peckover car f the king award decree the bill be to have a award  make by the king decree the defendant demurrer and insist the matter ought to  be try at law this court declare his majesty be the royal fountain from whence  all stream flow quaere chancery report er p
booth contra booth forfeiture notice trust and estate their difference the  uncle by lease and release settle the land in question to the use of himself  for life remainder to Humphrey the plaintiff for life remainder to his son  case in chancery er p first second three and four in tail the remainder to the  defendant for life remainder to his first second c son with power of  revocation and a proviso if Humphrey marry without consent of the uncle during  his life and after his death of a b c then the use limit to Humphrey and to  his son to cease and then to the use of the defendant he marry without consent  have no notice of the conveyance or proviso but his uncle who know not of the  marriage entertain he kind and give legacy to he by his will and die the  defendant disturb the plaintiff because of the forfeiture and dismiss to law  but the chancellor ask if it be a limitation of a trust or of a use resp use  chancellor then it be at law
booth contra SANKY mich car Trin car promise to deliver up a bind decree that  the plaintiff be indebt unto the defendant and one brown be indebt to the  plaintiff brown give a judgement to the defendant for the debt and the  plaintiff give bind to pay it if brown do not and to have up the bind upon a  promise of the defendant that if the plaintiff will at his charge extend  browns land he will deliver up the bind be the bill the defendant deny the  promise but upon a verdict that he do make such promise and proof of the  extent the bind be decree to be deliver up although brown fail in his verdict
booth v a warrant of the peace to bring the party before the baron of the  exchequer discharge by supersedeas upon a warrant from the sheriff of Derby  three of the person be poor person be bring up before the baron of the  exchequer for the peace which seem to be very unorderly do and procure but to  trouble the plaintiff it be therefore order that the cursitor for that county  shall make a supersedeas for the peace booth and other plaintiff John  defendant year Elizabeth
booth vers garnet award the give a note be the same as award payment at a  future day and SC more full debt upon a bind the condition whereof recite that  the plaintiff and Gilbert have submit a dispute to arbitration and therefore  if the defendant shall pay what Gilbert shall be award to pay not exceed l the  bind to be void on the replication it appear that the award be for Gilbert to  give the plaintiff his note for l Payable at a future day and it be insist  upon for the defendant that his bind be only to pay the money award and  therefore as the award be to do a collateral act it be not within the  condition but the court say that award be to have a reasonable intendment and  all the meaning of this be to give the party time and be equal to order he to  pay the money at the future day without say any thing of give a note in the  mean time and therefore they give judgement for the plaintiff strange report  er p
booth versus booth mich Ann B R where execution be stay by injunction till  after the year plaintiff must sue a cognizant fac show Mod Mod S c by  injunction out of chancery the defendant stay the plaintiff execution a year  and upward the injunction be dissolve the plaintiff take out execution without  a to know facias and this be refer to the court for irregularity the plaintiff  insist that he be stop by the act of the defendant and that if the defendant  have suspend it by writ of error so long he have be at liberty to take  execution without a to know facias say per curian we can take notice of the  chancery injunction and you may have take out a writ of execution and continue  it by vice come non to cause to go breve a supersedeas because improvident be  award to the execution a a in Michael v cue burr a defendant have obtain a  rule to show cause why a execution shall not be set aside be sue out after a  year from the judgement without a cognizant fa but the delay have arise on the  part of the defendant bybills in chancery for injunction and obtain time for  payment c the court hold that the rule for revive a judgement by cognizant fa  after the year be to prevent a surprise upon the defendant and ought not to be  take advantage of when the delay be occasion by himself and discharge the rule  with cost Salkeld er p
booth versus Davenant Trin James rotulo a bail take in the then king bench and  a action of debt bring upon that recognizance which be that if it happen the  defendant in that action to be convict then the manucaptors grant and every of  they grant that as well the debt as damage and cost which shall in that action  be adjudge the plaintiff shall be levy upon their land and chattel and in  easter term James the defendant upon a capias ad satisfac award against he do  not render his body but afterward mich James he do render his body and the  court accept of it and discharge the bail and whether the bail shall be  discharge or not be the question and the court hold the bail shall be  discharge and judgement be give for the defendant a award good in part and  nought for part and breach assign in the good part and hold good
booth versus johnson hill Ann side Lut where a place which be no will shall be  intend to be a will after a demurrer or verdict where the plaintiff in his  declaration lie the visne in grey inn or Whitehall which be no will yet after  a verdict or demurrer they shall be intend to be will and therefore if the  defendant will take any advantage he must plead no such will as grey inn c
bordeaux versus dr LANCASTEP ai hill W B R No fee due for Christian or bury  unless by custom and then he must do the duty case B R S C holt bordeaux a  French protestant have his child baptise at the French church in the Savoy and  dr Lancaster vicar of saint Martin in which parish it be together with the  clerk libel against he for a fee of S d due to he and S for the clerk a  prohibition be move for and levinz urge this be a ecclesiastical due by the  canon holt c j nothing can be due of common right and how can a canon take  money out of laymens pocket Lyndewode say it be simony to take any thing for  Christian or bury unless it be a fee due by custom but then a custom for any  person to take a fee for Christian a child when he do not Christian he be not  good like the case in Hobart where one die in one parish and be bury in  another the parish where he die shall not have a bury fee if you have a right  to Christian you shall libel for that right but you ought not to have money  for Christian when you do not
bordeaux versus dr lancaster hill W salk the plaintiff have his child baptise  at the French church in the Savoy and the defendant be vicar of saint Martin S  together with the clerk libel for fee due to they on which the plaintiff move  for a prohibition holt KB er p by holt CJ nothing can be due of common right  Lyndewode say it be simony to take any thing for Christian or bury unless it  be a fee by custom but then a custom for any person to have a fee for  Christian a child when he do not do it be not good for this like the case in  Hobart where a person die in one parish and be bury in another the parish  where be die shall not have a bury fee if the defendant have a right holt KB  to Christian he shall libel for that right and not as he have do where a  custom be deny prohibition shall go and it be say that burial at commonlaw  ought to be in the churchyard and without fee
Boreham versus uvaltham parish in Sussex salk SC a bastardchild bear pen the  appeal salk Mod Bulst Mod comb the case be Hester wood a unmarried woman be  big with child be by a order of two justice remove from Waltham to Boreham as  her last place of settlement from which order Boreham appeal but before the  next session she be deliver of this bastard child at Boreham and afterward the  order of the two justice be vacate upon the appeal and upon that the woman and  her child be send back to Waltham then two justice make a new order by which  the base child only be send to Boreham because it be bear there which order be  remove into b r by certiorari it be move to quash it say per curian the child  ought to follow the mother in this case because Boreham can not remove the  woman who be send thither by a order till the lev adjudge on a special verdict  that trover do not lie for a negro Carthew er p appeal be determine so they  have no remedy to prevent the birth of the child in their parish
Boreman and dickens idiot Polixphen pray a prohibition to suit of the  plaintiff inhabitant of brook where a person be a lunatic and coadjutor assign  by the bishop of Winchester and profit Keble er p sequester in the hand of the  churchwarden to maintain the cure by the church warden and the defendant a  coadjutor to the person of freshwater who be also a lunatic it by sir m  Branston official suggest that brook be a distinct parish and not a chappelry  of f as suppose and this plea be refuse in spiritual court prohibition per  curian nisi
BORMAN against Hammon bail Godbolt pl in to know facias on recognizance of  bail in a writ of error to prosecute with effect the defendant plead that he  do prosecute with effect whereby the judgement be reverse quod a preparation  be verify and do not conclude prout to stand open per record for which cause  it be on demurrer rule ill
borough OF Christchurch who ought to take the test fitzg S c upon a motion for  a information in nature of a quo warranto against the common freeman it be  hold that they need not be qualify by take the test for they do not exercise  any office relate to the government of the town and a information be deny
borough OF taunton pasch geo I appeal on poor rate may be to BoroughSessions  rate for poor and appeal to session of borough and hold well for there be a  clause in Elizabeth that say justice and session of borough shall have power  exclusive of county
borough versus master in chancery have a privilege to lie their action in  Middlesex as barrister have the plaintiff be a master in chancery bring a  action in the king bench and lie it in Middlesex now it appear upon motion  that the cause of action arise in London there be a rule make to show cause  why the venue shall not be change and upon cause show that in respect of his  attendance in westminsterhall Middlesex he have the same privilege with a  barrister and the court be of that opinion the rule be discharge
Bosanquet against rondeau the writ be returnable in eight day of saint Hilary  Jan and declaration file in the office de bene be January and notice give  defendant that day and a rule to barn plead give which be out on Saturday that  of January on Monday morning that plaintiff enter defendant appearance and in  the afternoon sign judgement the court upon hear counsel on both side be of  opinion that by the late Act of parliament the defendant have eight day to  appear after the return of the writ videlicet exclusive of the returnday and  therefore set aside the judgement the appearance be enter and judgement sign  one day too soon Darnal for plaintiff chapel for defendant
boson versus Sandford hill will B R lev Mod salk where the action be quasi ex  shrinking it must be bring against all case c in which the plaintiff declare  against six defendant set forth that Salkeld er p he load a ship whereof they  be owner and that they undertake the good shall be carry safe but that by  their negligence the say good be damnified by fresh water upon not guilty  plead it appear at the trial that there be more partowners of this ship than  these six defendant and because all the partowners must be equal liable the  action be quasi ex contract the court hold that the defendant shall take  advantage of it in evidence a for where the plaintiff bring a action on the  case he ought to declare accord to the truth of his case and if the jury find  a contract make by more than against who the plaintiff have declare it be a  variance and if this have be plead in abatement with a traverse without  Salkeld hoe quod super see assumpsit so much it have be ill because it be no  more than the general issue a this be not law vide note to S C in salk
boss against water trespass plea that a be seize in fee and demise to the  defendant replication that b be seize in fee and demise to the plaintiff  without this that the say a have any thing c be bad trespass for break a close  be bring in the bench by boss against water and the defendant plead in bar  that before the trespass the dean and chapter of Lincoln be seize in fee as in  right of their church and make a lease for year to he by their common seal and  so justify and give colour to the plaintiff to which the plaintiff reply that  long before the trespass one Brudnel be sense in fee and feoff the plaintiff  in fee and that he be so seize till the defendant commit the trespass without  this that the say dean and chapter have any thing in the say tenement at the  tinge of the demise c and the defendant rejoin that the dean and chapter be  seize in fee ut above c and this be hold a jeofail by all the court and the  jury ready at the bar be discharge accord h fol in trespass the traverse ought  to be without this that the dean and chapter be seize in fee or the defendant  may have traverse the lease at his election for both be material to the  plaintiff title hard Com dig title pleader g bull Ni Pri lease for year by  indenture to commence from Michaelmas subsist a former one if the first lessee  purchase the reversion the second lessee may enter at Michaelmas a man make a  lease by indenture for a term of ten year the term to commence immediate and  afterward the lessor lease the same land by indenture for the same term of ten  year to a stranger the term to commence at the Feast of saint Michael next  ensue c and then the first lessee purchase the feesimple so that his term be  merge the second lessee may enter after the Feast of saint Michael and enjoy  his term c by the opinion of the court in the bench prter brown
boston and forest vide Mr strange now move for the judgement of the court they  say that since this cause have be depend here there have be action of the same  sort both in the common plea and exchequer wherein this same point have come  in question both of which court have be of opinion that bailbond may be take  in double the sum contain in the ac etian all the court except judge page say  that in their private opinion they be not satisfy with the reason of these  resolution however that there may be a uniformity in the judgement they be  Willing to give judgement for the plaintiff especial too because when action  come here by original the party will have a opportunity of bring a writ of  error immediate in parliament and then this question maybe final settle at  less expense accord that judgement be give
bosvile versus coat Mod keb in debt upon a bind with condition that the  obligor shall bring in the son and daughter of I b at their full age to give  such release as a three person shall require the defendant plead that the son  be alive under age at Doncaster to which the plaintiff demurrer and hold he  may for it must be take at their respective age Vid   justice wyndham case
Bosworth versus Ridgley profert hic in curian litter forger of wills show S c  to know facias by executor upon a judgement obtain by the testator and upon a  general demurrer it be insist that the practice of this court in such case be  that the plaintiff in the to know facias shall insert this clause videlicet  profert hic in curian litter forger of wills c which be omit the writ be not  good to which it be answer that the practice be to insert that clause at the  conclusion and not in the middle of the writ and here this insert at the  conclusion Carthew but the court hold both form to be good and that in the c b  this clause be always insert in the end judgement for the plaintiff Carthew er  p
BOTAMLEY and Harrison the certainty require in describe the thing which a  action of trover be bring for error be bring on a judgement in the common plea  in a action of trover exception be take that the declaration charge the  defendant with find One parcellam of packcloth rappers and cord which the  counsel say be not certain enough parcellam be a word of a uncertain  signification and this same exception they say be allow in a case depend hill  but the court say that parcella seem here to signify a parcel or bundle of  good which be certain enough indeed in replevin c this will not be good for  there the thing itself be to be recover but here only damage however it stand  over lev v
BOTAMLEY and Harrison vide this matter now come on again the court seem to  think that parcella be a word too incertain thereupon Mr strange cite a case  in lev where parcella pensar lanear England a quantity of woollen yarn be hold  to be bad indeed the court admit that if in the case in question it have be  lie England a parcel or bundle that will have be good for in our language a  parcel or bundle of good be of a certain signification however it stand over  again
bott against sir edward BRABALON Bott sue a prohibition against sir Edward b  and suggest that the defendant be parson impropriate of W acre in Warwick and  that there time out of it c there have be a curate or a incumbent by the  appointment of the say rector who administer the sacrament c and that the  custom of that parish time out of c be that the curate shall have all ten  renew within that parish except Decimus a grain which be pay to the parson and  that every parishioner who have so pay the ten to the curate be discharge  against the parson and that notwithstanding that c sir Edward have sue he c  and now he pray a prohibition and have it but after that surmise be ad judge  insufficient without argument by the court and a consultation grant for such  curate can prescribe against his master that may remove he at his pleasure and  for that it be not good prescription for the parishioner
BOTTENHAM against Herlakenden Elizabeth in c b rot Herlakenden be seize of  land and devise the same to the plaintiff for year the remainder to his wife  for life proviso that the plaintiff shall pay to the woman Owen er p per annum  and if be fail of his payment c wherefore the woman enter and if this shall be  call reservation or reversion be the question Anderson a man can make a  reservation on a devise periam a man may to himself and his heir but not to a  stranger Anderson every devisee be in in the sire by the devisor and why shall  not this then be a reservation to the devisor and a grant of the reversion to  the woman gawdy wherefore can a man devise land reserve rend when by the  statute h he may devise at his pleasure periam because his pleasure must  correspond with the law Anderson if I devise land to another reserve rend to I  and my heir and then devise the reversion he shall have the rend as incident  to the reversion and the judge be divide wherefore c Elizabeth
BOTTER against COLSWORTHY trinity geo treasury rule for the late sheriff of  Devonshire to return a writ of capias ad to answer discharge terry late  undersheriff as usual in Devonshire have entrust plaintiff attorney with blank  warrant to be direct to bind bailiff only and he have fill up a warrant on  this writ and direct and deliver it to a bind bailiff pursuant to his trust  but it appear that barn this writ though returnable in easter term be not  carry to the sheriff office or tender to the undersheriff till April the court  think it unreasonable to oblige the sheriff to make a return prime for the  late sheriff pool for plaintiff
boucher against Monday June prohibition a prohibition be pray to the  ecclesiastic court suggest that he be choose by the prebend of S and his  lessee and b claim by the dean and chapter come to the place where the  official use to sit mind sedend and be disturb in denial of the key by the  official of the lessee the court conceive this a temporal act punishable by  action upon the case but unquen accouple or nient sa feme when by such trial  the party may be liable to adultery be tryable in the spiritual court and the  court deny a prohibition
Boughton contra butter car f certificate order to be file though not deliver  in the life of the certifier this Cause be refer to sergeant Rainsford to  certify touch the enclosure whether advantageous and whether the party have  consent thereunto chancery report who have draw up a certificate all write  with his own hand but he die before he have declare the same it be pray by the  plaintiff that the say certificate may be file and take to be authentic as if  he have deliver the same to either party the defendant insist that the say  certificate have no date and that the sergeant never intend to deliver the  same this court order the say certificate to be file notwithstanding the  objection make thereto by the defendant
Boughton versus CHAFFEY all c b bail practice curian we have determine over  and over again that the plaintiff may except to the bail above though they be  the same person that become bind to the sheriff for the defendant appearance  and that the defendant can move to stay proceed on the bailbond before he have  put in and justify bail in the original action trinity term geo h
boult and harris Monday may assumpsit in a quantum to deserve pro to visit  good merchandizis prius adapt vend the defendant promise to pay after verdict  it be except in arrest of judgement that this be too general as Cr Canway send  non allocatur the general course be to declare so and for diverse house  building be good indebitatus the reason be the same in both case the  particular lie in the plaintiff knowledge and judgement for the plaintiff  quantum to have to deserve be as good as quantum to be strong in Keble er p  debit pro vino mercimon not say vend yet hold good this be sufficient to show  the contract on which the action be ground
boult v blunt a de vilaica to move back for part of a parsonage and a  injunction for the house the plaintiff show by his bill that the parsonage of  Thekelye be hold by force whereby the plaintiff can not be induct whereupon a  writ of de vilaica to move back caryi er p be award out of this court and  thereby the plaintiff put in possession by the sheriff nevertheless the  defendant keep the possession of the say house appertain to the parsonage and  for that the plaintiff be bind to pay his firstfruits to the queen majesty  therefore a injunction be grant against he Thomas Boult clerk plaintiff sir  George blunt mile and Alice defendant year Elizabeth fol
boulton against fen assumpsit Siderf pl in action sur case in consideration  the plaintiff who be possess of diverse seaman ticket will forbear to molest  the defendant master sir George Cartwright he will pay after verdict Coleman  move in arrest of judgement that here be no consideration because the  plaintiff be not entitle by the assignment of the ticket nor sir George  discharge Jones pro plaintiff it shall after verdict be intend that the  plaintiff be lawful possess especial be far allege that the plaintiff have get  a order of sir George to pay they and this be not like forbearance general  which Twisden agree for have it be allege they be possess ut de good not  common with others it have be well enough and it shall be now so intend  especial because trover be common bring of such ticket and judgement pro  plaintiff
boulton and cannam rend debt in debet to hold off for rend as to one quarter  nil debet as to the rest that the october before due the executor offer to  surrender and wave the possession and that they have no asset and the house be  of less value than the rend the plaintiff reply that at the same time of the  surrender there be l arrear Polixphen for the plaintiff conceive he can not  wave and h on which dr saint and the late book be find be deny in Yelverton  and Paul and moody James Keble and the court a reed he can wave but the rend  be aver more than the land this be no surrender till the other accept it this  be not alter by notice waver or assignment and so not like the other case but  like Cr maul and debet to hold off be hold good after verdict or in to hold  off only after assignment on intendment that the rend be more than the land  say adjornatur whether it lie thus or not
boulton and kind of beer ante executor debt against the defendant as executor  in debet to hold off the defendant not rely on the undervalue but upon the  surrender its a ill plea and though it be double yet this be aid by the  replication that there be arrear unpay and till pay he can receive the  surrender if a executor do administer he can wave the term but be Chargeable  in debet to hold off if the land be as its always intend better than the rend  but if as Cordwins case it be special plead that the rend be more and that he  have no asset so Caly and josceline and Vandenits case its good both way on  this difference and judgement for the plaintiff nisi
boulton versus ARLSDEN pasch W salk per holt c j cur where the master give the  servant money to buy good for he and he convert the money to his own use and  buy the good upon tick if the good come to his master use he be liable  otherwise not in the case of sir Robert Wayland be use to give his servant  money every Saturday holt KB to defray the charge of the forgo week the  servant keep the money and yet the master be hold liable and it be say that a  note under the hand of a apprentice or servant shall bind his master where he  be allow to deliver out dote though the money be never apply to the use of the  master but if he be not accustom to deliver out dote there his note shall not  bind the master unless the money be apply to the master use
boundary pascae James king UNTONS case sir Henry unton knight be seize of fee  of diverse manor hold by knightservice in capite convey the same by deed  execute in his life to certain feoff to the use of himself and the heir of his  body beget and for default of such issue to whether Kniglitley his sister the  wife of sir Valentine Kniglitley and the heir male of his lie body beget and  for default of such issue to Cicely Wentwortli another of his sister wife of  John Wentworth esquire and the heir male of his body beget the remainder to  the right heir of the say sir Henry unton whether Knightley die in the life  time of sir Renry unton without heir male have issue only whether Elizabeth  and mary the say sir Valentine then and yet live and have no other issue but  the say three daughter they be his coheir apparent sir Henry unton die the of  march Elizabeth without issue the say Cicely lie er p Wentworth whether  Knialitley the daughter and Elizabeth Knightley be then of full age and the  say AYary f the age of eleven year and nine month all this be find by office  and now mary accomplish her full age pray her special livery question be  whether the say mary ought to compound with his highness for her marriage or  not before livery be sue which be resolve by Fleming chief justice and coke  chief justice of the common plea and Tanfield chief baron upon mature  deliberation that mary ought not by law to be a ware to his majesty for her  body during the life of sir Valentine her father nor to be Chargeable to the  king majesty for the value of her marriage notwithstanding the say sir  Valentine be never tenant by the courtesy of the say land nor the say whether  at any time seize of any of the say land but that the say mary ought to sue  her livery without compound for her marriage or the value thereof see ambrosia  gorge case accord coke fol
Bourke and Bridgeman how far a plea of a state account shall be good in a  court of equity chancellor house the plaintiff bring his bill to have a  account of such part of the personal estate of one Alexander dempster as be  not comprise in a state account the defendant plead the state account in bar  the attorney general defend the plea he say the account be agree to be make of  all matter concern this personal estate which the party mutual claim a right  to by the statute of distribution accord the account be make up and settle  Barnardiston king b er p and yet the plaintiff will now come and demand a  discovery of particular item suppose not to be comprise in it but still at the  same time allow the account to be right take he observe that this be contrary  to the common notion of proceed either the item must be deny in particular by  falsify they or say they be not allow or else a surcharge must be bring in but  in the present case neither of these way be take so that the plaintiff will  unravel the account without point out one error in it accord the chancellor  say this must not be suffer and therefore the plea be allow vern
bourn against church trinity geo Skinner move for defendant the day before the  day appoint by notice for trial to put off the cause by reason of the absence  of a material witness the motion be deny because by the course of the court  these motion must be make at least two day before the day of trial and because  it appear by the affidavit whereon the motion be ground that the witness go  out of town after notice of trial give so that have the motion be make in  proper time it can not have be grant
bourn against mason and robin assumpsit winch dell Br march pl dell Br in  consideration Parry will permit the defendant on request of the defendant to  sue in his name to recover against one chanter he will pay Jones except in  arrest of judgement that the plaintiff be a stranger to this and nothing move  from he be not say at his request this be a unlawful consideration be not say  in consideration he will give authority send non allocatur for per curian  after verdict to permit and to give authority be all one so be one booth case  powis pro plaintiff it appear b owe p money so he be party but adjornatur
bourn against mason and Robinson pl asset in dell Br that Parry be indebt to  mason and to the plaintiff and one chanter be indebt to Parry and in  consideration Parry at the request of the defendant will then give leave to  the defendant to sue chanter and receive Keble their money which be the great  debt they promise to pay a less videlicet livre to the plaintiff powis pray  judgement this be a good consideration to the plaintiff as mich sprot against  agar on treaty of marriage between the plaintiff and one locker daughter  mention by the defendant and in consideration the father will give consent the  father of the son promise to pay and adjudge either party for who Keble er p  benefit the promise be may have the action and Twisden who be counsel for  sprot say it be there hold the action lie by the father and that no notice be  necessary but per curian here the plaintiff be a stranger and no meritorious  cause move from he but it be like the case of delabar and gold and this be not  like the case of where in consideration a physician will cure the defendant he  promise to pay so much to the daughter of the physician and judgement be give  pro plaintiff and per curian this be a good consideration and benefit to the  physician in preferment of his daughter but in consideration a will go to York  I will pay to b so much this be ill Cr but agree that between a and I this be  a good promise and so it be here as to Parry but not as to the plaintiff but  in consideration a will go to York about the affair of b I will pay to a this  be a good promise between I and a and albeit the colloquium be inter all men  part and the promise make to the plaintiff bourn himself yet judgement stay  and money take in execution be order to be restore post
bourn against mason ante assumpsit dell Br Medlicot show cause why money shall  not be restore but that the plaintiff shall have judgement on Cr rivet and haw  and manwood and Burston Leond Keble pl that this be a sufficient consideration  and Rockwoods case Cr and Keeling Ch just incline it be well enough as to the  consideration Keble er p but per curian the action lie not by the plaintiff in  regard the defendant do not promise to discharge the plaintiff and he be a  stranger to the plaintiff the promise be make to one Parry in consideration he  will permit the defendant to sue one Chantrell and recover he will pay the  plaintiff and another that be creditor of Parry and so Dummilos case he to who  the promise be make must bring the action and the plaintiff have still remedy  against he but adjornatur
bourn v pigot attachment undue get discharge the plaintiff arrest the  defendant in the king bench and then serve her with a Subpna out of this court  to be examine before the townclerk of London to discover matter against her  self in the same cause and because she be not examine get a attachment against  her and get her arrest whereupon she appear and be discharge of the contempt  by the court bourn plaintiff Pigot defendant year Elizabeth
bourn vers MATSAIRE replevin for skimmers and ladle certain enough Cas tempt  hard SC much full bull l n p Bac Abr Com dig pleader king in replevin it be  hold to be certain enough be for skimmers and ladle without say how many of  each kempster v Nelson pale yellow Rep in b r cite Cas tempt hard ace the  principle on which it be hold good be that though such a declaration will be  in on demurrer yet the plead have supply the defect because the avowant have  avow the take have thereby take upon himself the knowledge of what the good be  Cas tempt hard bull l n p
bourn vers turner landlord can be make defendant in a ejectment in the room of  tenant in possession upon affidavit that he be a material witness for the  former see Tri at Ni Pri side pl Mod Richard Reg Bac Abr Cas tempt hard n to d  Edward sergeant comens move on affidavit that the tenant in possession be a  material witness for the landlord that therefore the landlord may be make a  defendant in the room of the tenant in possession strange contra insist it be  never do and it will not make he a witness when do S p do v William Cowp et  per curian he be liable for the mesne profit the declaration be regular  deliver to the tenant in possession it be never do in this court though  sergeant comens say it have be do in c b
bourn versus mason all keb in a assumpsit the plaintiff declare that whereas  one parry be indebt to the plaintiff and defendant in two several sum of money  and that a stranger be indebt in another sum to parry that there be a  communication between they the defendant in consideration that parry will  permit they to sue in his name the stranger for the sum due to he they promise  that they will pay the sum which Ventris er p parry owe to the plaintiff and  allege that parry permit they to sue and that they recover after non assumpsit  plead and a verdict for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that  the plaintiff can not bring his action for he be a stranger to the  consideration but in maintenance thereof a judgement be cite in between sprat  and agar in the king bench where oh promise to the father in consideration  that he will give his daughter in marriage with his son he will settle so much  land after the marriage the son bring the action and it be adjudge  maintainable and another case be cite of a promise to a physician that if he  do such a cure he will give such a sum of money to himself and another to his  daughter and it be resolve the daughter may bring a assumpsit which case the  court agree for in the one case the party that bring the assumpsit do the  meritorious act though the promise Ventris be make to another and in the other  case the nearness of the relation give the daughter the benefit of the  consideration perform by her father but here the plaintiff do nothing of  trouble to himself or benefit to the defendant but be a mere stranger to the  consideration wherefore it be adjudge quod nil to take in hand per billam
bovey and busby how far the ecclesiastical court have a jurisdiction between  ecclesiastical person in the case of slander the party be both clergyman the  plaintiff libel against the defendant in the ecclesiastical court for these  word you be a old rogue and a rascal and a contemptible fellow despise and  hate by every body and likewise for say of he at another time you be a liar Mr  Filmer now move for a prohibition notwithstanding the first set of word be lie  to be speak against the plaintiff function the chief justice doubt whether in  such case the ecclesiastical court Barnardiston king b have not a jurisdiction  however a rule be make to show cause judge page absent
bovey vers Castleman Indebitatus assumpsit lie not for a wager see send for  Mod Semb send for Mod d send for salk Mod see also Mod post Mod comb lev but  assumpsit will lie on the mutual promise Indebitatus assumpsit the plaintiff  declare that there be a agreement between the defendant and he that if the  duke of Savoy make a incursion into dauphine within such a time that then the  plaintiff shall give the defendant and if the duke do not make the incursion  into dauphine within the time limit that then the defendant shall give to the  plaintiff which agreement be reduce into write and sign by both the party and  the plaintiff aver that the duke of Savoy do not make any incursion into  dauphine within the time limit by which the defendant become indebt to the  plaintiff in and be indebt assume to pay c upon non assumpsit plead verdict  for the plaintiff and now Mr Northey move in arrest of judgement that there be  not any consideration to raise a debt for no debt can arise between the  plaintiff and defendant upon the incursion of the duke for it be but a wager  for which indebitatus assumpsit will not lie because there want a real  consideration but for mutual promise assumpsit may lie but not indebitatus  assumpsit for indebitatus assumpsit will lie only in case where debt will lie  but in this case debt can lie quod to be concession per totan curian and  therefore judgement be give quod to express grief nil to take in hand per  billam
bow con Edward car f rehear upon the penalty of Triple cost the plaintiff suit  be to have a redemption of land and the defendant insist on the antiquity of  the say mortgage and that by reason of chancery report long lease in chancery  report er p be at the time of the mortgage the defendant can not receive any  benefit of the premise till the lease expire the Lord chancellor at this hear  be November dismiss the bill but the plaintiff pray a rehear on the merit of  this Cause and offer precedent where relief have be frequent give upon  mortgage more ancient this court grant a rehear upon the penalty of Triple  cost if the plaintiff be not relieve the case be videlicet that the plaintiff  be seize in fee of the premise worth pound per annum in mortgage the same to  the defendant father for pound and the plaintiff agree and accord seal a deed  for the absolute purchase of the premise to the defendant father if the pound  be not pay at the end of seven year the defendant insist that the plaintiff be  possess of the premise in reversion after the expiration of certain leass for  year from the crown do by deed with fine and recovery thereupon and date  January sell the say premise to the defendant father in fee who never in his  lifetime receive any profit the lease expire after his death chancery report  which come to the defendant and he hope accord to enjoy it be a absolute  estate without any Defeazance the master of the roll be assist with Mr justice  hide on plead the first order and a bill which be exhibit by the defendant  father against the plaintiff to have the land or money which make it appear a  mortgage and of several precedent where relief have be give in case of like  nature decree a redemption pay principal and damage see James v Kerr Ch d
bow vers Barnett special bail be not always necessary in a action of debt upon  a judgement upon a rule W show cause why there shall not be special bail in a  action of debt upon judgement it appear that one of the special bail in the  original action have abscond and that the other be become insolvent the rule  be discharge sayer and bV the CourtIt have be frequent hold that if there be  special bail in the original action and the plaintiff in that action bring a  action of debt upon the judgement therein obtain he be not entitle to specil  bail in the latter action as there be a degree of vexation in bring a action  of debt upon a judgement such a action ought not to be favour
BOWCHIER against coster apprentice march pl in action of covenant Scrogs move  in arrest of judgement show the custom of London to turn over a apprentice  from one to another and that such to who such apprentice be turn may have a  action of covenant upon special issue on the several breach assign and verdict  for the plaintiff that the breach be quod abstraxi see a slavery so many night  and during that time do not serve he which per curian be find against he be  good enough that he do not serve accord to his covenant whereas no covenant be  make with the plaintiff yet if this second covenant have be omit it have be  good enough and the conclusion such non to hold convent make with the  plaintiff be as well as can be judgement for the plaintiff
BOWDAGE against the attorneygeneral the case be the same except that no  security be give on the second deputation and the like decree michaelmas term  the OF whether
bowden against warren amendment defendant in consideration that he have  receive promise that if the plaintiff testator be evict by Cheswell then he  will pay c to Bowden the testator and it be say that after his death videlicet  which be before c be evict which be move by Baldwin in arrest of judgement but  curian contra for the videlicet be void as if by Twisden h declare in  ejectment of seize may and that after videlicet may the defendant ejeci which  be impossible and therefore immaterial be after issue as well as if there have  Keble be no time lie for the eviction which be but form and to be demurrer to  and therefore judgement for the plaintiff
bowden and hutchins rend in replevin the defendant avow for rend on reversion  devise by I S who be say to be seize in fee and afterward die not say ind  seisitus to which the plaintiff demurrer general send non allocatur for though  this be the better plead and ill on special demurrer yet its aid on general  demurrer for be seize in fee it shall be Keble intend to continue and if by  any mean it can be intend but form it shall be so upon a general demurrer as  whenever its d after verdict as dyer want of averment of life yet wile justice  say in C B in walker case want of atturnment be supply by a army pron   interrog  he be seize yet its ill on general demurrer and judgement for the  avowant
bower and write c tax Mr solicitor pray to quash order of session on appeal  from the subcommissioners of the excise because it appear not by the order  that any security for single duty be deposit with the subcommissioners in gloc  therefore on car cap the justice have no jurisdiction and on affidavit that  the justice be inform there be no security the court quash the order because  be a limit authority it must be set forth in the order it self and its not  like W cap of adjacent will which must be but need not be return but this be  in person non judge
bower v SWADLIN this case be take from atkins it do not appear in Lord  hardwicke notebook I atk a release to one obligor be a release to both in  equity as well as at law roll Abr g skip touch har   light a n skip v Huey atk  ex part smith p wms hawkshaw v Parkins swan Rep west tempt Hardwicke er p  where there be a assignment of a bind in trust for other precedent to a  release though without consideration it will be a material question whether  the obligee can release or if it can operate to the releasee as he be a  trustee in the assignment every man be suppose to be conusant of a deed to  which he be himself a party a obligee give a release to one f the obligors in  a bind the bill bring by the representative of the obligee and likewise by a  trustee under the assignment of this bind for the sum condition to be pay by  the bind the defendant insist by way of plea that a release to one obligor be  a release to all Lord chancellor there be no doubt but a release of one  obligor be a release in equity to both as well as in law but if there be a  assignment of the bind in trust for the benefit of other precedent to the  release though the assignment be with or without consideration it will be a  material question whether the obligee can release or if it can operate to the  releasee as he must be presume to have notice of this assignment be himself a  trustee in the assignment and every man be suppose to be conusant of a deed to  which he be a part his lordship direct that the cause shall stand over till  the defendant have answer to the date of the release for it do not appear at  present whether the release be precedent or subsequent to the assignment
bower vers man error be not verify by a certiorari testae before the writ of  error accord to the report in l raym the ground of affirmance be mere that the  certiorari bear testae prior to the assignment of error and therefore can not  be a certiorari to verify the error upon that assignment vide Bellew v Scott  ante l raym on error e c b the placita be of mich Geo and the judgement be of  the same term the writ of error be test Oct primo Geo favorable and the  assignment of error be of the Trinity term follow to verify the error as to  want of a original the plaintiff take out a certiorari testae June Geo upon  which there be a return that there be no original and the defendant in error  upon that plead in nullo be erratum strange pro to ward off in wandering  object that the error be not verify for the late king die June and therefore  the testae of the certiorari be the of June primo of the present king and the  writ of error in October primo make it to be four month before the bring the  writ of error and a year before assignment of error the consequence of which  be that it can be take as verify the error nor indeed to be the certiorari  which the court award for they award one after the error be assign and this  appear to be another take out before the court think the objection good and  affirm the judgement after they have refuse a second certiorari because it be  in order to reverse a judgement accord to the case of Merrifield v berry ante
bower versus cook Mod SC salk SC by the name of power v clerk Danv p debt  against a executrix when she be administratrix see Yelv vent such plea without  a traverse and replication as here and hold good debt against the defendant as  executrix of John cook her late husband the defendant plead in abatement that  John cook in the bill mention die on such a day and place intestate and that  afterward the ordinary of that place grant letter of administration to her of  the say intestate S good S c pretense quaran she have administer several good  which be the good of the say intestate in quo grammatical case the plaintiff  ought to name her administratrix and not executrix hoc parat be verify c and  then conclude thus sacred scripture unde ex quo she be not name administratrix  in the bill petit judgment si self ad billam prediction responders to turn the  war thither to withhold c and upon a demurrer to this plea the objection be  that the defendant ought to traverse without hoc that she bad administer as  executrix say per curian the plea be better without such traverse for if the  truth be that the defendant have administer in her own wrong before  administration be actual grant to her that matter ought to come in by way of  replication by the other side as it be in the case cite in the margin footnote  Carthew but holt chief justice object against the conclusion of this plea  which be a plea in abatement ought to be petit judgment de billa quod billa  ill empty but the conclusion above be proper only to a plea in nonability of  the person or to the jurisdiction of the court and for this reason only  judgement be give against the defendant quod to answer ouster
bower versus street mich and notice of trial regulan cur mich see Vid anon  post p and smith v hoff post p Deighton v Dalton post p in this cause the  practice as to give notice of trial come in question and be settle by the  court videlicet that the plaintiff and defendant shall give a term notice of  trial in all case where the issue have be join above a year but if there have  be any intermediate proceed as notice of trial or the like there only common  notice be necessary vide buxom pellow post mich Geo two where the practice be  likewise settle that where a term notice be requisite such notice must be give  before the essoinday
BOWHEE v grills may Vid bagshaw v earl of thanet Nov earl Gower v duchess of  may Christ coll Dec the defendant without be serve with a subpoena to appear  put in a plea and answer the plea be allow a question be make whether the  defendant be entitle to cost have appear voluntary Lord chancellor hold that  by the practice the defendant do not lose his cost
BOWINGTON vers parry Laced head can be bring into court in trover for a lace  head strange move to bring it into court but be deny Olivant v Perineau post S  p
bowl against clark Trin banc sup why a prohibition shall not be grant to the  prerogative it be show for cause upon a rule of court why a prohibition shall  not be grant to the prerogative court that in the will which the prerogative  court style report er p endeavour to repeal there be land give to the executor  the court answer if the prerogative have power to prove a will they may also  repeal it by appeal but if land be devise together with good they have no  power to repeal it as to the land but if they shall have no power to repeal it  as to the good it will be mischievous but they have no authority to make the  devise good or ill as to the land and the court be at first agree to grant a  prohibition as to the land only but afterward the court hold that there can be  no such division make of the will by prohibition as to stand good in part and  to be repeal for the rest and so will not grant the prohibition notam
bowl and Langton slander ex motion Withens the court refuse to grant a  procedendo on call the plaintiff whore because the word as appear by affidavit  be not speak in London but in Surre and the party not live in London so not  within the custom of London and the last rule for a procedendo be set aside
bowl v johnson subpoena without tender of expense will not bring a witness  into contempt though he come to the assize and refuse to be swear motion for a  attachment against one Yerburgh for not give evidence at the assize he be  subpoena but have no offer to have his expense bear but come to the assize  where money be tender he for that purpose but he refuse to be swear because  this be a action of assault against Johnson for a joint trespass with Yerburgh  against who another action be bring in which Johnson be subpoena to be a  witness against he lee CJ this be a new case attachment be a new practice I  remember the first motion for they it be then agree that the same restriction  shall be use in attachment as in action on the Elizabeth one of which be that  a tender of expense shall be make at the service of the subpoena in this case  Yerburgh have not be subpoena regular so as to subject he to Elizabeth in  order to subject he to a attachment you must show he guilty of a contempt of  this court this man happen to be in court but be not bring there as a witness  whether Blackstone er p he be a material witness or no be not significant I be  of opinion this be not a contempt wright I in chapman and Pointon a p Geo two  guinea be tender to a evidence on a subpoena the court think it not sufficient  so will not grant a attachment Blackstone though the witness will not come  attachment be not yet grant in c b a person not proper subpoena be to be look  upon only as a slander by and it be no contempt of the court of nisi prius for  a slander by to refuse to be examine much less of this court denison and  foster be accordant the rule discharge b a stram east n a S c b full v  apprentice I h Bla holme v smith I marsh taunt Haltell v mare east see also  the case refer to in r v budge post
bowl v walley a commission to put the plaintiff in possession injunction be  dissolve or disobey a commission be award to the sheriff of Nottingham and  Derby to put the plaintiff in possession of certain land for which he former  have a injunction against the defendant which they have disobey William bowl  plaintiff Richard walley and Alice defendant year Elizabeth fol
Bowldes v Newport dyer b er Catesby against bawd and wife and BOWEDES against  Newport and wife estrepement lie between judgement and execution in quid law  proclaim a writ of estrepeqnent be pray by Catesby against bawd and wife after  judgement in squid jerk clausal and before execution and it be grant see m h a  writ of estrepernes t be grant by all the justice of the bench for Bowldes  against Newport and his wife in aid jury proclaim of tenement in Wallington  and Clothall in the county of Hertford ex lib bill see t e a pl for the saint  point S between judgement and execution in assize for two acre plead to each  several the plaintiff make several title and join issue by ventat asst sa  super title lo in the singular number this be well enough and shall be refer  to each sander chief baron ask this question in assize the plaint be of two  acre of land the tenant plead two several bar for the two acre special and the  plaintiff make two several title at large S for each acre one to which the  tenant plead let the assize come upon the title S lariat assist super tupelo  in the singular number and the assize find one title for the plaintiff and the  other for the tenant and against the plaintiff whether the plaintiff shall  recover for the acre and title which be find for he quaere and as it seem to  dyer Catlin and to himself the plaintiff shall recover dyer for the one and  shall be bar for the other and so be the judgement give afterward as sander  report against the opinion of mariot michaelmas term queen E LTZABET H
bowler against jenkin hilary geo defendant live above forty mile from London  and plaintiff proceed to trial at a sit there upon ten day notice no defence  be make and defendant insist that he be entitle to fourteen day notice of  trial move to set aside the verdict and have a rule to show cause which be  make absolute by the Act Geo no cause be to be try in London or Middlesex  where defendant reside above forty mile from London or Westminster unless  notice in write be give at least ten day before such intend trial before this  Act fourteen day notice be the settle practice and unless necessitate the  court will not be bind by a Act make to take away a benefit from defendant the  practice or law of the court can be take away but by negative word I e there  shall be no more than ten day notice fourteen day notice notwithstanding this  Act still necessary Hayward for defendant agar for plaintiff barn er p
bowler against Owen mich geo defendant be a outpensioner of Chelsea college  and the question be whether or no he be entitle to the benefit of the Act of  parliament as a soldier in his majesty service the court hold he be not be  under no military discipline and subject only to the control of the  commissioner
bowler versus Owen mich geo ill barn S c a out pensioner of Chelsea college  deny a common appearance not reckon a soldier Vid Nicholls all v wile post p  stat Geo ill cap Geo ill cap Geo cap a motion by a out pensioner of Chelsea  college for a common appearance suggest that he be a soldier and within the  Act Geo two cap for prevent mutiny and desertion the cook c p court deny the  motion and hold the defendant no soldier within the meaning of that statute
bowman against MILBANIKE devise Fitzherbert SC I lev disapprove smyth v smyth  Ch d see also jarman on will Edward vol p devise Siderf pl h possess of  burgage land mind to cause to testify by testament devise all to my mother all  to my mother which appear by special verdict in ejectment and the court  incline that no house or land pass hereby Glyn for the plaintiff the heir at  law conceive though the word be general and uncertain yet have no precedent  discourse of any land nothing shall pass also if it be a good will at  commonlaw yet it can be say accord to the custom however the word be most  rational satisfy in the pass the personal estate Jones for the defendant the  custom be find that land may be devise by parole and be as strong as if the  word be at commonlaw in write in which case there can be no more extensive  gift then all who in all respects to say nothing to shut out so all his estate  of all kind be comprehend or nothing Cr be liable to the same objection as  here so Bendlows and Owen devise of all my livelihood passes real and personal  estate so Cr and the word of our will can be satisfy with less nor shall the  court intend there be good here be none find and in Kerman against johnson  case b r by Twisden it be adjudge that by devise of his estate the real as  well as personal pass and so he conceive here Windham conceive the jury ought  to have find with what intent in relation to the burgage the devise be make  and not to have leave it to the court Keeling the verdict be good so hide but  this all be a adjective and not to be satisfy without a substantive and so not  like the devise of all estate but too general to pass any thing but at least  to pass any land judgement for the plaintiff the heir at law nisi
bowman against milbanke disapprove smyth v smyth Ch d a will wherein he say I  give all to my mother land do not pass thereby S c I side raym keb Danv vide I  salk Mod all Mod post vent Mod lev hob cite shower case ejectment and a  special verdict where a man seize of land in Newcastle upon tine where land be  devisable by parole by the custom by a parole will devise in these word I give  all to my mother all to my another and whether the land pass by those word be  the question and it be argue by Glyn the king sergeant for the plaintiff who  say that by the word all it be uncertain whether he intend land or good and by  Jones for the defendant who say that he who give all except nothing and cite a  case where by the devise of all his estate all the estate as well real as  personal levinz pass and bendl where a devise of all his livelihood extend to  land and good but by the court all be altogether uncertain and not sufficient  to disinherit a n heir and they give judgement for the plaintiff that the land  do not pass by the will
BOWNAS against WILCOCK widow trespass bring by tenant against landlady who  have distrain for rend for break and enter plaintiff close and shop and take  and carry away his barn er p farrier tool and good the declaration contain  five count fol motion by defendant to reduce the five count into one rule to  show cause on plaintiff part a affidavit be produce prove six different  distinct trespass but the court do not consider these as similar to count in  assumpsit the barn trespass on different day may be lie in one count for break  and enter the house and shop on such a day c with a continuando and another  count may be add for take the good c without lie the take to be out of the  house and shop the declaration order to be reduce into two count pool for  defendant prime and will for plaintiff
bowyer all contra bird car foe estate decree to the residuary legatee and not  the administrator the suit be to have a account of a legacy of pound give by  George dale father of the plaintiff whether to George his son also decease to  who the plaintiff whether be administratrix and to have a account of the  residuary estate of George the father after his debt and legacy pay the bill  charge that George the father make his will in write and thereof his son  Thurston dale and one Dakin executor and upon publish of his will declare  Dakin only to be executor in trust for his child and to take no benefit  thereby but the estate to go to the child and die leave the plaintiff whether  and three son videlicet the say Thurston George and Robert dale all decease  and that Thurston make the say Dakin his sole executor and the plaintiff  whether be the only survive child of the say George dale the father and claim  the say pound and the residuary estate chancery report this court it appear by  the say will that the say Thurston who be name executor without any trust be  residuary legatee of the say George dale his father who have give by the say  will considerable legacy to every one of his chancery report er p child be  full satisfy the plaintiff be not entitle to the say pound nor the residuary  estate but that the say Thurston as residuary legatee be well entitle to the  residue of the say estate and that the say trust in Dakins ought to be  construe as be most consistent with the will in write and dismiss the  plaintiff bill
bowyer and spry error error of judgement in the court of Launceston be assign  that it do not appear to be a court of record send per curian this be admit by  the writ of error also its curian domini king tent army a letter patent which  per curian be a court of record though under S be not hold before suitor and  judgement affirm
bowyer vers bampton the innocent endorsee of a game note can maintain no  action against the drawer but he may sue the endorsor upon his endorsement  upon a case state at nisi prius in a action by the plaintiff as endorsee of  several promissory note it appear that the note be give by the defendant to  one John church for money by he know advance to the defendant to game with at  dice and that church endorse they to the plaintiff for a full and variable  consideration and that the plaintiff be not privy to or have any notice that  any part of the money for which the note be give have be lend for the purpose  of game upon this a question arise upon the statute Ann c which say that all  note where the whole or any part of the consideration be money know lend for  game shall be void to all intent and purpose whatsoever whether the plaintiff  can maintain this action against the defendant and after two argument the  court be of opinion he can not for it be make it of some use to the lender if  he can pay his own debt with it and it will be a mean to evade the Act it be  so very difficult to prove notice on a endorsee and though it will be some  inconvenience to a innocent man yet that will not be a balance to those on the  other side and the plaintiff be not without remedy for be may sue church on  his endorsement and it be but the common hazard of take note of infant or feme  covert as to what holt say in Hussey v Jacob it be not the point adjudge and  the chief justice say he have see a report wherein notice be take that all the  learned part of the bar wonder at it vide low v Waller Doug strange report er  p
bowyer versus cook mich W Mod the plaintiff here have mislay his action  against the defendant for he be charge as executor when he be but  administrator which be plead in abatement and exception be take to the plead c  holt CJ in a action against a executor the old way be to plead numque executor  and numque admin as executor but this be a dangerous way and it be better to  plead that he be not executor but that the bishop have grant administration to  he in this case and that prove he not to be executor and then there be no  reason that there shall be a traverse indeed if the defendant be sue as  administrator and he plead that there be a will and he be make executor there  ought to be a traverse without hoc that the testator die intestate but where  he be sue as executor and he plead that be die intestate there needs no  traverse the plea here be much better without it for he allow that he be  Chargeable as to the right but it be in another manner than you have charge he  and show it to be as administrator which be enough be a full answer to the  declaration he need not traverse administration as executor before when you  charge he in your declaration only general but you ought to reply and show  what act of administration holt KB he have do and at commonlaw a administrator  be suable as executor
bowyer versus milner   Ent r ab in a formedon against several tenant one  appear and be essoined and then another appear and it be move whether he can  be essoined by reason of the statute of W c which seem to be that parceners  and jointtenants shall have but one essoin and that they shall not church cur  contra the statute be to be understand of essoins after appearance and so be  the book of Edward it be say to have be the law of the time for tenant to  church before appearance and so be   Inst hob the case of essoins if the  tenant vouch two one essoin may be cast for each of they single Vid stat of  glouc c Ventris er p
box a attorney against Barnaby action upon the case for these word George box  be a common maintainer of suit and a champertor and a plague of God consume he  and I hope to see his body rot upon the earth like the carcase of a dog and I  will have he Brownlow goldsborough throw over the bar next term and I will  give a beech to make a gallows to hang he and judgement give for the plaintiff  for this word champertor and no other Trin James action upon the case for  these word she be a arrant whore and have two bastard in Ireland and judgement  by the whole court that the word will not hear a action
box against read and another affidavit of one of the defendant hold sufficient  to find a motion to change the venue
box v allen April bill to be relieve against a order of the commissioner of  sewer demurrer to so much of the bill as seek to alter any of the order of the  commissioner or to return any money by then receive for that the remedy be at  law and no equity to be relieve in this court the demurrer be overrule Mews  dig sewer and drain see Att gentleman v Forbes my Cr
Boxley and French against STUBINGTON prerogative court Hilary term February  that in a contest respect the validity of a marry woman will make under a  power the court will decree a monition against the trustee under the marriage  article though he may not be a party to the suit to bring in the counterpart  of the article which be in his possession see further p post mary Stubington  decease wife of William Stubington have power by marriage article to make a  will and dispose of one thousand pound she accord make her will on that  September and appoint messrs Boxley and French her executor the husband oppose  the will the proctor for the executor allege that the original marriage  article be in the hand of the husband and pray that he may be assign to bring  they into court which the husband proctor oppose and allege that the  counterpart of the article sign by the husband be in the hand of Mr winter her  trustee per curian I thereupon refuse to assign the husband to bring in the  original article but decree a monition against winter though he be not a party  in the cause to bring in the counterpart which he do accord
boy against NORCLIF ante pl in continuance Br abatement Windham hold it but a  plea in abatement and no error Lord shrewsburys case I Boulstr which the court  agree Keelingabsente as in case of Barecock against Thomson nichils in to know  facias amount to a to know to make and judgement be then well give  notwithstanding release before if it be not plead also Edward be express  judgement affirm
boy against NORTCLIF in continuance Br abatement h pl in default Br h b pl  brief Br h b double plea Br Leond Bridgp pl Edward b h seize Br dissent Br  Jones assign for error in ejectment that the plaintiff after verdict and  before day in bank enter forcible into the land the writ be hereby absolute  abate as by death c there be no time to plead it in the court and the  judgement quod recupere boundary be hereby frustrate Weston for the defendant  this do only make the writ abatable because h the plaintiff may maintain his  writ h h Edward Cr Carsi against Lovel that the defendant reenter before  judgement which Windham agree and that by death the writ be actual abate but  entry must be plead puis dar to join in abatement only hide Twisden do doubt  the plea be in ejectment because it have be adjudge in the exchequer that  reentry will not revive the term but Keeling accord with Windham Adjornatur pl
boy against twist and other trin geo notice of trial for the last sit within  easter term be continue till the sit after that term and afterward continue  till the first sit within this term defendant urge that the notice can not be  regular continue a second time and have make no defence move for a new trial  and obtain a rule nisi upon show cause court be of opinion that plaintiff can  continue his notice a second time that be he shall give short notice but once  but this notice be object to only because it be a continuance the full time be  give by it and have the word continue be out defendant agree the notice will  be good that word shall out vitiate the notice the full time be give especial  as it be swear by Jones plaintiff attorney that townsend defendant attorney  request he after last term to continue the notice till this term rule  discharge but by consent verdict be set aside upon payment of cost give  judgement in debt and take notice of trial within term chapel and comens for  plaintiff Eyre for defendant
boy v else Nov whether fraud or not in tithing lamb in a bill for tithe a  question arise whether there be fraud in tithing lamb on this case the ewe be  keep by the defendant in the parish of Driffield in the county of York where  the demand lie all the year until Christmas when they be ready to drop their  lamb and then be remove into the parish of skern where there be a small modus  only for lamb and there keep till ladyday for convenience of forage as insist  upon by the defendant and at ladyday be bring back to Driffield notam there be  no demand of tithe pro rata and quere if there have if it can be decree for  the tithe of lamb must be pay where they fall and be not a divisible thing as  wool S notam the land in skern be the defendant own per curian here be not a  sufficient proof of fraud and the plaintiff bill be dismiss but page and  Gilbert baron think at first it may be proper to send it to a issue to try  whether fraud or not fraud and whether this have be the usual Bunbury er p  method of the defendant course of husbandry but afterward they concur with  baron price
boyce plaintiff lomax and his wife defendant bill to be relieve against a Writ  of enquiry execute without notice the defendant plead and demurrer for that  the remedy be proper at law the plaintiff exhibit his bill to be relieve  against a Writ of enquiry of damage on a judgement obtain at law and suggest  that the say Writ be execute without any notice give to he or to his attorney  and that the judgement be not fair obtain the defendant demurrer for that if  any injury be do to the plaintiff his remedy be proper at law report tempt  finch and they plead that they bring their action at law against the plaintiff  and have fair proceed therein to judgement which they have obtain and that the  matter for which complaint be now make be proper at law and therefore this  court ought not to take conusance thereof the court allow both the plea and  demurrer
boyed who tam against the hundred OF Exminster venire on stat hue and cry  Edward I stat c Elizabeth cap a motion to set aside the trial have in this  cause because the venire be award de corpore come alias how de hundred de  Exminster whereas the action be on a penal statute videlicet the statute of  hue and cry and so not within the stat Ann c Act for the amendment of the law  but the court be of opinion that the statute of hue and cook c p er p cry can  not be esteem a penal statute but a Act make to give the party a satisfaction  for a wrong do and therefore hold the venire well award
BOYFIELD vers brown at guildhall where savage fall short of the fraught it be  a total loss upon the execution of a writ of inquiry before the chief justice  it appear that the defendant be a insurer to l upon corn in the year  subsequent to this determination the London underwriter introduce a memorandum  at the foot of their policy by which it be declare that corn fish salt fruit  flour and seed be warrant free from average unless general or the ship be  strand and in mason v Skurray sit after hill term park on mark insur a loss  similar to the present be hold to be a partial one and to come within that  exception vide also bailiff v Modigliani ibidem the value of which be l that  the corn be so damage in the voyage that it sell only for l and the fraught  come to l and upon this the question be whether as the fraught which the  plaintiff be oblige to pay exceed the savage this be not to be consider as a  total loss and for the plaintiff it be insist that he ought not to be in a  worse condition than if his corn have go to the bottom of the sea for then he  will have have no fraught to pay and now that the voyage have be perform  whereby the fraught be become due he have a right to apply the savage to  discharge that it be prove to be the usage where the savage exceed the fraught  to deduct the fraught out of the savage and make up the loss upon the  difference for the defendant it be insist that as his insurance be upon the  corn and the whole do not perish he ought in make up the loss to deduct the  savage but no instance can be show on either side of a adjustment where the  fraught exceed the savage the chief justice be of opinion that within the  reason of deduct the fraught when the savage exceed it the plaintiff be in  this case wherein it fall short entitle to have it consider as a total loss  and the jury find for the plaintiff accord strange report er p
Boylston against Radcliff obligation to two the one become bankrupt his part  be assign to the other obligee SC raym keb vide I Mod salk show debt on a  obligation to Boylston and Stodder enter in to they by Radcliff and on a  special verdict the case be that Stodder become a bankrupt and the  commissioner assign the debt to the plaintiff the coobligee who bring the  action be a creditor himself and the assignment be for the benefit of himself  and the other creditor if by this assignment he alone may bring the action be  the question and it argue by finch for the plaintiff that he may and that this  be the only mean for the recovery of the debt for if it have be assign to  another he alone can not bring a action on the bind for the moiety and the  action ought to be bring by virtue of the statute in his own name though  before the bankruptcy it ought to be bring in the name of the obligee and now  the whole interest be in the obligee Boylston one levinz moiety in his own  right and the other moiety for the advantage of the creditor and therefore he  alone shall maintain the action in his own name for he be obligee of the one  moiety and assignee as to the other and be all one person therefore it be to  be sue by he alone for after the assignment it can be sue by he and Stodder  and thereto Wyndham justice incline but none be ready on the defendant part it  be adjourn
Boylston against russell Friday June pasch car assumpsit in action sur case  against the defendant to who hand good of the testator be come as executor and  the plaintiff intend to sue her she in consideration that the plaintiff will  be patient and quiet say she will pay and Newdigate Keble er p move in arrest  of judgement after verdict pro plaintiff that this be no good consideration be  not say that if he will be quiet and patient to forbear but it be say that if  he will be so patient and quiet he shall not lose a penny and the averment be  that he be patient and quiet it be not say that for the consideration  aforesaid the defendant super see assumpsit which per curian on the case of  buckler against angel be ill but they conceive the first well enough in regard  be patient as be intend for ever and Keeling Ch just say this be a good  assumpsit the word amount to it and the conclusion be promise assumsionem too  little curan which after verdict be well enough but adjornatur
Boynton against sir robert SPRIGNAL July the trust of a term void by  acceptance of a fee the fee be defeat the term decree to beneficiary and trust  a term convey on trust to be void on purchase and settle on sir b Sprignal for  life and after to his wife for life with remainder over of a indefeazible  Title c and this trust be declare by deed indent after the husband accept of  land in Buddington part of the land of the Lord craven and desire the same in  lieu and satisfaction of what be to be do the Lord craven on restoration of  the king enter the Lord chancellor decree the trustee to surrender the lease  to the purchaser of the land which be alien by sir Robert Sprignal note a  trust by deed interpret to be satisfy by the land of a bad Title though the  deed of trust be of a indefeazible Title on proof of discourse and mention  that the meaning be to settle delinquent land and the feme covert bind by  agreement of the husband
Boynton and SPRIGNAL fine on evidence in trial at bar of issue out of chancery  it be agree per curian that by a fine by beneficiary and trust of term of year  to the vendee of the inheritance the use and trust be extinguish though it be  say the Lord keeper finch have nil service thereby in chancery and Jackson the  trustee that have assign contra to trust be admit a witness to prove  acceptance by the defendant the beneficiary and trust of another place in  satisfaction and verdict for the plaintiff Keble er p
brabant contra perne car foe copy of deposition not to be record or exemplify  deposition of witness under the hand of a six clerk then in a Cause between  butt and Perne about thirty year since the plaintiff in this Cause pray the  same may be record the record of the original deposition in that Cause be lose  but the defendant pernes counsel insist it will be of dangerous consequence  and precedent to suffer copy of deposition to be record and use as evidence in  case of Title of land there be no Cause in court or party to the say former  suit there be since the dismission of the say former suit two trial bring by  the say butt concern the say thing in question upon both which two nonsuit  pass against the say butt Title the witness which be examine chancery report  in this court be all then live and two verdict upon full evidence on both side  and one other verdict since have be find for the defendant Title against the  now plaintiff Title and some of the witness at the say trial have swear  otherwise than be express in those copy of the deposition which the plaintiff  will have now record and exemplify this court will not allow the say copy of  the deposition to be record or exemplify but they be before order so to be by  the master of the roll it be order they shall be vacate and make void and  cancel and take off the file
BRABIN and TRADUMS case a prohibition for a seat in the church the case be  that the churchwarden of d have use time out of mind to dispose and order all  the seat of the church whereupon they dispose of a seat to one and the  ordinary grant the same seat to another and his heir and excommunicate all  other who afterward shall sit in the seat and a prohibition be pray and grant  for this grant of a seat to one and his heir be not good for the seat do not  belong to the person but to the house or otherwise when the person go out of  the town to dwell in another place yet he shall retain the seat which be no  reason and also it be no reason to excommunicate all other that shall sit  there for such Popham er p great punishment shall not be impose upon such  small offender a excommunication be giving up devilish the same term in the  same court
brace case if a feme sole executrix of a term mary he in the reversion and die  the term be not drown but the administration of it shall be commit otherwise  perhaps if she have purchase the reversion and it be the case of one Owen that  if the debtee mary the debtor that the debt be not go but the adminstrators of  the feme shall have it
Brace S case mich W Com he be commit by commissioner of bankruptcy and the  conclusion of the commitment be until he conform himself to our authority and  be thence deliver by due course of law holt KB er p Cowper shower and Northey  for the prisoner that the conclusion of the commitment ought to have be until  he shall submit himself to be examine upon interrogatory accord to the intent  and meaning of the Act for be a special authority to commit the word must be  pursue here the commissioner require Brace to tell all that he know touch the  estate of the bankrupt and that be too general they ask when and in what  manner do you aid or assist in imbezilling the estate of the bankrupt not  whether he do aid or assist and for not answer then commit he holt CJ the  prisoner must be discharge for the conclusion of the commitment be ill so  where justice holt KB commit overseer until they shall be deliver by due  course of law where the statute say until they account we discharge they here  the conclusion shall have be till he shall submit and be or to be examine  touch the premise or as Mr Cooper say upon interrogatory
brace vers daniel error c b trespass way et arms for take and detain the  plaintiff cattle the plaintiff declare that the defendant Samuel Daniel march  way et arms at averton in Essex to take in hand to lead away et to carry away  a mare a bull c of the plaintiff after judgement by nil to say a writ of  inquiry be execute and damage find for the plaintiff and final judgement give  for he upon which the defendant Daniel bring a writ of error in the king bench  and the judgement be reverse may this term because the verb be in the plural  number there be no positive charge that the defendant take the cattle
Bracebridge v Bracebridge in unction grant to settle possession recover at the  commonlaw the plaintiff recover dower at the commonlaw and have judgement and  execution but the defendant be rich and wilful will not let her have any  benefit thereby whereupon she set forth her title by bill in chancery and pray  the aid of this court to have her possession establish by injunction and upon  a letter write by my Lord dyer chief justice of the commonplea and justice  mead before who the trial be have crave the Lord chancellor aid for the  plaintiff he grant a injunction for her possession Bracebridge widow plaintiff  Thomas Bracebridge defen year Elizabeth
Bracebridge v Bracebridge the plaintiff recover her dower at Com law but by  the potency of the defendant keep from execution and relieve here it be move  by master solicitor general on ten defendant behalf that the issue join  between the party in this court be only whether the land claim by the  plaintiff be parcel of her dower recover at the commonlaw or no and therefore  meet to be trved by the commonlaw but master Beaumont be for the plaintiff  allege that albeit the Plaintiffbath recover her dower at law yet the  defendant be of great power in the country keep her out contrary to the same  recovery therefore a injunction of this court be award choice case in chancery  and the matter by order to be retain Bracebridge plaintiff Bracebridge  defendant year Elizabeth
Braceby v dalton practice in a action upon the case Mr win move on affidavit  that the defendant do not know the plaintiff that the attorney for the  plaintiff may give a account who his client be and where he live but the court  refuse it say it have never be do but in a who tam quaere vide gin v kerby and  the note ante short v king ante
BRACHER against cotton hill geo at nisi prius a juror be withdraw by consent  and matter in difference refer to arbitrator who award cost to be tax and the  question be whether or no prothonotary ought to allow cost of the reference  hold per cur that these cost ought not to be allow chapel for defendant Eyre  for plaintiff
BRACHER versus cotton hill geo if prac ring barn S c No cost on a remanet or a  reference cook the cause at the first assize be make a remanet at the second a  view at the three the cause be refer and at the four a verdict be find for the  plaintiff it be now move for the plaintiff that the cost of the first and  three assize may be allow but the motion be deny the prothonotories all  declare that no cost can be allow for the remanet or the reference there be no  proceed thereon and that this be the practice except on a reference there be a  agreement that the cost shall attend the event of it cook c p er p
bracken con Bentley car f reversion of good after a life give to I S the  possessor for life decree to give security to deliver the good or value after  her death good and a library to the defendant for life and after to the  defendant daughter and her heir for ever the plaintiff marry the daughter who  be since dead so as the plaintiff as administrator seek to compel the  defendant to give security to deliver the good chancery report to the  plaintiff after the defendant death or the value thereof this court decree the  same accord and a Commission be award to the master to examine upon oath such  witness as shall be produce before he
Bracton versus lister a action against a administrator and not show in the  declaration that letter of administration be commit to he and this be hold by  the court incurable for though they need not show by what authority they be  commit yet it be necessary to set forth that administration be commit to  charge he with the action otherwise of a executor it be not necessary to show  he prove the will because a action lie against he before probate
BRACYS case mich W B R ld raym S c Mod commitment by commissioner of bankrupt  till the defendant conform to their authority ill post pl Mod case comb S C  Sett and Rem holt Brace be commit by commissioner of bankrupt bring a habeas  corpus whereon the commitment be return and this exception take that it be  that he be commit toprison there to remain till he conform himself to our  authority the case be that he refuse to answer to such question and  interrogatory as they put to he relate to the bankrupt estate and the statute  empower the commissioner to commit in that case till he submit himself to be  by they examine and the court hold the word conform instead of the word submit  to be well enough because it be of the same sense but because the commissioner  have other authority beside that of Salkeld examine and it do not appear but  it may require a submission to they in other respect and for that all power  give in restraint of liberty must be strict pursue and in this case they have  but a special authority and must not exceed it they hold the return nought a a  vide Str Bl r hawk ch S and note to say section in that edition where it be  state that commitment ground upon act of parliament must pursue the conclusion  which the statute prescribe and where a man be commit as a criminal the  conclusion must be until he be deliver by due course of law if he be commit  for contumacy it shall be until he comply
Bradborn against vavisor Friday Feb execution wile move to quash a elegit  because partial execute on the oath of one witness the jury extend livre a  year at the value of four noble which per curian be no cause to quash it  contra if he have extend three part instead of a moiety the elegit be not file  and yet be take out a capias for the rest of the damage which per curian he  can do unless a nichil be return but the court will not force he to file it  but the party grieve may take a and quer but they will not grant a supersedeas  so upon a know fa after the year also when he that sue a elegit bring a  ejectment to try the title on notguilty plead he must in evidence show the  elegit file and per curian they can force the extenders at the return of the  writ here as he may do on a statute and they refuse to refer this to the  secondary or stay proceed on affidavit of this matter Linch v Beal report date  linch against beal ante trover in demurrer Br Cr pl after the plea of  coverture set aside sander plead sale of the good by a stranger in market  overt which Jones pray may be set aside also this action be trover and the  point often adjudge but sander hold it a good plea be by a stranger and not by  the party himself Edward pl and do not amount to the general issue but the  court hold they all one Keeling absent Adjornatur Keble er p
Bradborn and read sewer ex motion Mr solicitor winnington for new trial in  trespass where the defendant justify under the commissioner of sewer which be  after quash and by north chief just of c b in trial at York albeit the  commissioner be not guilty by this vacat yet the defendant be for who benefit  the order be make to tax the level on the case of turnor and Felgate the tax  be to reimburse the defendant as overseer and the original decree on the level  be yet in force and the plaintiff within it and this that be quash but  additional and both be good at the time of the distress for which this action  be bring and in the last trial at Nottingham it be say Windham justice be of a  contrary opinion that neither commissioner nor officer be trespasser and a new  trial grant
Bradburn versus tailor b r error contrary to the record may not be assign this  be error upon a judgement in the common plea and the error assign be that the  defendant as it appear by a certiorari to the clerk of the warrant of the  common plea and his return thereof have affiled his warrant to defend by  William round his attorney and that it appear by the judgement which be  transcribe that the defendant appear and defend by George long his attorney  but per cur this error assign be contrary to the record therefore the  judgement must be affirm vide Str ld raym
bradbury against burch enter trin car rot in c b action for a seat in the  church Bulst cro Mod lev lev raym salk salk Lut in a action on the case for a  seat in a parishchurch by prescription as appendant to a house without  allegation of the repair the defendant plead prescription Jones t in he and  his ancestor and traverse the prescription allege by the plaintiff per cur the  traverse be impertinent and the case rest only on the disturbance and  judgement be give after verdict by the whole court for the plaintiff and a  difference be take between a prohibition and a action and the case between  Buxton and baker in b r be cite and agree to have be adjudge upon this  difference
bradbury con leader buck car f interest upon interest decree this court do  declare that the plaintiff ought to have interest for their interest money  from time to time when it be a state sum
braddyll former JEHEN against JEHEN prerogative court easter term may article  of a allegation which have be in substance plead before reject but letter  allow to be plead in supply of proof see pp and ante lee dr Simpson for young  Jehen John Jehen make his will that October and appoint his brother young  Jehen his executor afterward in February he marry and his wife be with child  he die in August the child be bear after his death and die soon braddyll the  decease widow cite the executor to prove the will she oppose it and allege it  be revoke in law by the subsequent marriage and child lee several plead be  give in the brother plead that the wife and child have provision out of  thereat estate that decease after his marriage look on this to be his will may  have destroy it when he will lie long ill and expect to die and upon these  plead examine witness but their deposition be not publish and now he give in  another allegation plead minutely circumstance relate to his illness and  several letter in proof thereof per curian but I be of opinion to reject those  article relate to his illness because the substance of they be plead and  examine to already and it be dangerous after witness have be examine to allow  another examination to the same matter only diversify by some circumstance but  I allow the letter to be plead in supply of the former allegation and in  support thereof
bradford against lassel in a ejection firm the case be thus a man seize in fee  convey his land to the use of himself for life and to his daughter that shall  be unmarried at the time of his death until every one of they shall and may  levy l first unto the old daughter until she have levy l then to the second so  to the three c the father die the son enter and continue possession for a  certain time and will not suffer the old sister to take the profit if she may  now enter and take the profit until she have levy l or if there shall be a  defalcation for the time that the son continue possession be the question  walmsly seem d that she shall have her remedy against the son for the time  that he have continue possession and not to begin now to levy the l in  prejudice of the other sister for it be her folly to suffer the son to  continue possession
Bradley against adey mich geo action of covenant on deed for nonpayment of  rend for land in ken lie in Middlesex motion to change the venue deny if local  defendant will have barn er p advantage if transitory the venue can be change  the action be on a specialty win for defendant
Bradley against BENNEY error upon a recovery in a assumpsit in Bristol court  there the plaintiff have count that the defendant be a common carrier by boat  from Bristol to Gloucester and that he have deliver two butt of muscadel to  the defendant who assume to transport it pro a certain money summa the  defendant his assumption aforesaid not care e the aforesaid butt so long and  careless keep that one of they run Noy er p out and the defendant plead not  guilty and the issue find against he and now upon error by the court the issue  be erroneous for it ought to have be non assumpsit for the plaintiff reply  upon that chief
Bradley against breach monstrance notam per curian on oyer demand unless the  plaintiff do show the bind the court will set aside the judgement as irregular  if a attorney die the plaintiff or defendant must be require to make a new  attorney unless any do undertake the suit as attorney voluntary for the  plaintiff or defendant
Bradley against his wife in baron feme Br baron feme he procure I S to sue he  and his wife in a action for good take away by her and have judgement by  confession of the husband which the court set aside as illegal but if on issue  it have be try I S may have take both they order all such bind and write of  the husband as she take away to be redeliver by her to he they refuse to bind  he to the peace at her suit unless her life be in danger because by the law he  have power of castigation and the bishop of London have certify he use to beat  her but that she use to provoke he and that by reason of their wilfulness he  can not end their difference accord to the reference of the court last term
Bradley against pinchbeck hill geo exception that February bail justify in  court three day within last easter term same bail as in bailbond plaintiff  show cause why proceed on bailbond late put in suit shall not be stay with  cost bail can justify in vacation unless by consent four day to justify in  full term be allow after exception take in vacation time rule absolute sans  cost
Bradley and Anonymous a promise to pay a debt out of a sum due by a rd person  do not create a specific lie upon such sum this be a bill bring by a against b  and one of his debtor that the court will stay the money in the debtor hand  and not to suffer he to pay it to b for fear of his misapply it b have promise  to pay the plaintiff demand out of such specific debt but the chancellor  refuse it clear and will not suffer it to be argue because the plaintiff as  creditor of a b have no specific lie upon such debt as they insist upon and  that he will not lie such embargo upon person to prevent their pave their debt  for the consequence of such decree will be a great stagnation of commerce and  repugnant to that course of circulation which the well be of trade demand that  if a man be indebt to another and have a suit depend and promise to pay he out  of the money to be recover upon such suit and the creditor upon the faith of  such promise forbear to sue he yet all this will create no specific lie on the  money recover suppose the question arise upon a real estate and the debtor  promise to pay this creditor his demand who upon this confidence forbear  distress he if the debtor recover the estate yet his creditor Ridgeway tempt  Hardwicke have no specific lie on it even before the statute of fraud much  less since it be common for person who have expectation from the death of  their friend to promise to pay their debt out of such legacy yet such promise  will not bind such legacy specifical notwithstanding such creditor may think  they have right to such a express lie by virtue of their forbearance
Bradley v Crackenthorp deposition of a witness examine de bene be direct to be  publish in order to be use at a trial at law the witness be age and infirm and  unable to travel
Bradley versus hutchinson executor amendment a to know facias upon a judgement  in debt the defendant plead pleinment administre general and the plaintiff  demurrer special for that cause and Jones solicitor general move to amend the  plea because the defendant ought to have plead special Raymond sir t hale  chief justice the judgement bind the good and therefore it shall be presume  that the same be rightful administer Twisden justice it have be adjudge a good  plea but let the plea be amend if the defendant will
Bradley versus Jones Trin rotulo the plaintiff bring his action upon the case  for unjust vexation the defendant have exhibit article against the plaintiff  to have the good behaviour against he and take his oath before doctor caryi  one of the master of the chancery and afterward the defendant cease Brownlow  goldsborough prosecuaation there and obtain from the king bench a supplicavit  to have the good behaviour there and the court be of opinion that the action  will lie because he prosecute in the king bench and not in the chancery but  the court say that if he have prosecute in the chancery though the article  have be scandalous yet no action will have lie for a man shall not be punish  for mistake the law for he may be misadvise by his counsel
Bradley who tam v long Nov information for import brandy not allege that it be  foreign brandy ante pl SC bunb in a information for import brandy vinum burn  upon the stat Geo it be not allege that it be foreign brandy but conclude  contra form to cause to stand in arrest of judgement per curian the conclusion  contra form to cause to stand will not aid but the question be whether vinum  burn do not ex way termini import the brandy to be foreign and now it be  adjourn to be consider and precedent to be search Bunbury notam afterward in  term S mich per price page and Gilbert baron judgement ought not to be arrest  upon this objection
bradshaw against BOKINGHAM Intr m Elizabeth c b rot it be adjudge that if a  commoner enclose part of the waste in which he ought to have common that by  that all his common be extinguish we h h
bradshaw against bradshaw arch court Trinity term June that a application for  interest on a legacy reject dr bettesworth for Thomas Bradshaw Robert Bradshaw  die in march make his will and appoint Elizabeth his wife executrix she take  probate give a legacy of l to his nephew Thomas Bradshaw in these word item I  give to my wellbeloved nephew Thomas Bradshaw the sum of l to be pay by my  executrix before her death executrix decline pay it and therefore we have  bring this suit for the legacy with interest from the testator death she have  tender l S and allege she have pay for say Thomas S already the word of the  will imply a immediate payment of the legacy because it be uncertain how soon  she may die the S be a debt which his court can determine upon and interest be  due from her delay of payment lee dr hay contra S be advance for his freedom  and she have make affidavit that Thomas apply to her for that money to pay for  his freedom the will leaves it to the discretion of the executrix to pay the  legacy when she think fit but I admit under those word it will be Payable upon  demand from the legatee but that must be a legal demand by a suit the  principal question be whether this legacy shall carry interest a legacy  Payable at a certain day shall carry interest from the day of payment vern  Jolliff and crew Prec in Chan interest can be due upon a legacy upon which no  interest can have be make judgment sir George lee I be of opinion the tender  be sufficient that the lee er p S as the executrix be a stranger in blood to  the legatee must be presume to be money advance in part of payment of the  legacy and as to interest upon such small legacy as this upon which no  interest can be suppose to have be make the court never allow interest  especial to a stranger de least non curate law
bradshaw against bradshaw prerogative court Trinity term June rd the word rest  and residue include the whole personal estate Robert Bradshaw die a bachelor  make his will and appoint his mother Elizabeth Bradshaw sole executrix give  her a legacy of absolute lee and devise to her a message with the appurtenance  c for life and then give to her the use and interest of his plate furniture  money stock and all the rest and residue of his personal estate for life and  the remainder after her death of all such effect and residue he give to his  cousin Thomas Bradshaw his heir c for ever Thomas Bradshaw cite her to bring  in a inventory and account she give in one set forth the particular but not  the appraise value of any and say she have sell part of the plate and stock  but do not set forth to who nor the value thereof Thomas insist that all the  effect ought to be appraise and the particular value of each thing to be  specify in the inventory Elizabeth counsel urge that as the will be word all  the specific thing mention therein belong absolute to her and that only the  residue exclusive of they be give to Thomas and therefore she ought not to set  forth the value for otherwise the word and the rest and residue will be  useless judgment sir George lee but I be of opinion that the word rest and  residue be useful to take in his whole personal estate in case anything shall  be omit in the enumeration of particular and that the testator give her only  for life the use of specific thing and the interest of his money stock c and  she have no power to alienate any part thereof on the contrary that chancery  will compel her to give security that every thing or the value thereof  reasonable wear and tear be allow shall be forthcoming at her death I  therefore direct that the plate good c shall be appraise lee and that she  shall give in a further inventory specify the value of each particular
bradshaw against SAVILL certiorari Mr attorney pray the spare of a attachment  on James cap for that it appear by affidavit that the cause of action be under  and the steward a barrester of above three year in which case the cause be not  to be stay below but per curian if the cause appear by the declaration to be  above be can proceed as here after habeas corpus to remove the cause deliver  but whether it be under or above can be make out by affidavit but must be  return so by the steward and he ought to allow the habeas corpus whether it be  above or under but if it be under he may proceed notwithstanding such  allowance say adjornatur
bradshaw and andrews ante sheriff error of judgement in Ireland in action upon  the case on false return that the plaintiff be in his custody and verdict for  the plaintiff sander except that the defendant below sheriff of Galloway can  have a prisoner in custody in Dublin but per curian this may be on habeas  corpus or by fresh suit and be after verdict that find the false return the  court will presume he legal in custody and judgement affirm
bradshaw and andrews trin car two rot sheriff in action upon the case on false  return of non be invention by the sheriff of Galloway in Ireland it be aver  the sheriff at the time of delivery of the capias have the person in custodian  at Galloway in the city of Dublin and the action be bring in the county of the  city sander assign for error after verdict that albeit by new habeas corpus  the sheriff may have a prisoner out of the county yet on a capias deliver to  he out of the county he be not bind to hold he there so upon latitat c which  be no warrant to the sheriff to take but only within the bailiwick and to this  the court incline but adjornatur because be after verdict it must be intend he  be legal in custody
bradshaw versus mottram leave to prosecutor to compound with defendant the  plaintiff bring a who tam upon the stamp Act against the defendant for marry  without licence and have he in execution where he have lie some time and now  York cite the Elizabeth c and produce a affidavit of the poverty of the  defendant and have the leave of the court that the plaintiff may compound with  the defendant strange report er p
bradshaw versus Swanton mich W m Carthew prohibition to the consistory court  of Durham where the libel be for substraction of tithe the suggestion be that  a verbal composition be make between the holt KB er p plaintiff and the  defendant for all manner of tithe stuff and the libel be between a composition  for tithe arise within that time and a difference not where the composition  for life and year for in the first case a prohibition recite cion be for life  and to prove this the case in the in at though several book to which holt c j  answer and so it be resolve that though several book tell we that a  prohibition will lie where the composition be for year and where the  difference be take ut above yet the law for several year pass have be clear  take that no prohibition will lie upon any composition whether for life or  year for any tithe and therefore the proper remedy be to appeal to the arch if  the consistory court shall refuse a plea of composition a prohibition be deny  quod notam
bradshaw versus Swanton prohibition will not lie where there be a composition  for tithe show S c than pl prohibition to the consistorycourt of Durham where  the libel be for substraction of tithe the suggestion now be that a verbal  composition be make between the plaintiff and the defendant for all manner of  tithe for two year and the libel be for tithe arise within the say time and a  difference be now take between a composition for life and for year for in the  first case a prohibition lie but not where the composition be for life and to  prove this the case in the Yelv cro cro Elizabeth bugg v uvoodward margin be  cite to which the chief justice answer and so it be resolve that though  several book tell we that a prohibition will lie where the composition be for  year and where the difference be take ut above yet the law for several year  pass have be clear take that no prohibition will lie upon any composition  whether for life or year for any tithe and therefore the proper remedy be to  appeal to the arch if the consistorycourt shall refuse a plea of composition  in this case a prohibition be deny quod notam
Bradshaw versus walker hill James rotulo action upon the case bring for these  word videlicet thou art a filch fellow and do filch from a b a and judgement  that the plaintiff shall take nothing by his writ for it shall not be intend  that he steal the money judgement arrest for the incertainty of the court
brady against lambert error march pl in error Br in error of a judgement in  ejectment give in Ireland of land in the county of canan Burton except that  there be no return by the chief justice to who all writ hence be direct as Cr  Dalton against air and Bulst but per curian no return be ever make by the  chief justice of any writ and so be all the precedent but a return must be  make by somebody Adjornatur pl
brady against lambert pl error error Br Livesey secondary on search of  precedent say that beside king there be never any writ of error beside this in  question that have any cognizant fac in it but only bare writ of error nor be  any return make to any of they or very rare
BRADYES against johnson Bradye bring a eject firm against Johnson and declare  upon a lease of land habend a die that thence predict and do not speak of any  indenture before and for that the declaration adjudge nought and so it be  between bell and march and this same term between spark where it be show quod  to go away per the same indent where he have not speak of any indenture before
brag against nightingale mich car banc Reg Trin car rot l demurrer to a  declaration in a action of covenant Bragg bring a action of covenant against  nightingale upon a indenture the defendant demurrer to the declaration the  case be this the plaintiff let by indenture certain house for diverse year to  the defendant and covenant with he to repair the house by such a day express  in the indenture the defendant by the same indenture covenant with the  plaintiff that from the time that the plaintiff be to repair style report the  house unto the end of the term for which they be demise he will well  sufficient repair and leave they so repair at the end of the term for not  perform of this covenant on the defendant part the plaintiff bring his action  the cause show for the demurrer to the declaration be that the plaintiff have  not show that he on his part have repair the house accord to his covenant and  so the defendant suppose he be not bind to repair because he be to repair from  the time the plaintiff have repair they and not before and so there be no  cause of action after diverse motion roll chief justice say that here be a  reciprocal covenant to be perform on each part and although one do not perform  the covenant on his part this do not excuse the other party but he be tie to  perform his covenant nevertheless and if be do not a action lie against he and  he may bring his action also against the other that first break his covenant  and therefore the action lie here against the defendant and so the demurrer be  not good upon the cause style report er p show but if this be not a reciprocal  covenant the law will be otherwise and cite hay and hay case car and skippon  and Lucas his case car but Bacon justice hold the contrary that the demurrer  be good for that it appear that it be the intent of both party that the  plaintiff shall first repair and after that the defendant shall keep the house  in repair the court will advice
brag case a woman have cause to he endow of a manor in which be copyholder do  demand her dower by the name of certain message certain acre of land and  certain rend and not by the name of the three part of the manor and she do  recover and keep court and grant copyhold it be hold by the whole court that  in such case that the grant be void for she have not a manor because she have  make her demand as of a thing in gross otherwise if the demand have be of the  three part of the manor for then she have a manor and may have keep court and  grant copy and the plead in that case be that she do recover the three part of  the manor per nomen of certain message and acre and rend which be hold to he  no recovery of the three part of the manor
brag v Harrison barn er brag one c against Harrison trinity geo rule make  absolute for a common appearance and supersedeas plaintiff cause of action be  as endorsee of a promissory note Payable to one Ripley or order which note  have be put in suit against defendant by Ripley and in that action a common  appearance and supersedeas order Hewitt for defendant nares for plaintiff  process service thereof rule c
brag versus digby pasch will B R variance between writ and count not pleadable  without crave oyer of the writ oyer vide ante and post lev sand Mod S C case  B R Andrews in case on several promise by original the defendant without crave  oyer of the writ plead variance betwixt the writ and the count show particular  wherein and the plaintiff demurrer and it be adjudge that the defendant shall  answer over for he ought to have demand oyer of the writ before he can take  advantage Salkeld er p of the variance because though the writ be in court the  court yet be not upon the same roll with the count the defendant can plead to  it without demand oyer b b r ac will but oyer as a original be not now grant  and the plaintiff may proceed as if it have not be crave boat v Edward Doug  vide king v amery t r
Bragg assignee of Bragg versus wiseman executor of fitch mich James rotulo  action of covenant bring and the case be this that fitch and his lady be seize  of land in right of his wife for term of her life and join together in a lease  by deed indent in which be these word demise and grant and afterward fitch die  the lady enter and avoid the lease and make a new lease to a stranger  whereupon a ejection strong be bring against the first lessee and judgement  thereupon and the first lessee put out of possession whereupon the first  lessee bring his action of covenant against the executor of fitch upon the  word demise and grant the defendant demurrer the word be have demise grant and  to farm let for year if the wife shall so long live and judgement for the  defendant a covenant Brownlow goldsborough er p in law shall not be extend to  make one do more than he can which be to warrant it as long as he live and no  long the law do not bind a man to a inconvenience if tenant for life make a  lease for twenty year and covenant that the defendant shall enjoy it during  the term that shall be during his life for the term end by his death but  otherwise it be if the covenant be during the term of twenty year by the word  demise a action of covenant lie although he never enter and this word demise  imply as much as to give away concession a action of covenant bring for that  the defendant covenant to bring again a ship peril and damage of sea only  except and he to excuse himself say that the Hollander in a warlike manner by  force and arm take the ship and much doubt be where the issue shall be try and  the opinion of the court be that the action shall be try where it be lie
braham versus aspinal c b error visne in debt upon a obligation condition to  pay money at the house of one yarrow in Woodstreet great London the defendant  plead that he pay the money at the say house in Woodstreet but name no parish  and upon that a venire fac issue to the parish of saint Michael Woodstreet and  find for the plaintiff and judgement and the defendant bring a writ of error  and after the record certify Raymond sir t allege diminution in the venire fac  and upon the return thereof it appear to be as before and the now plaintiff  assign this for error for that the parish of saint Michael be not name in any  part of the record Twisden the word of the statute of James cap be by reason  the visne be sue out of more place or of few place than it ought to be so as  one place be right name be to be intend when some of the place be name in the  record and therefore if a action be lie in d and a venire fac issue de corpore  comitatus there although the venire fac be award to more place yet it be not  good because the body of the county be not name before in the record and it be  adjourn but afterward it be rule good be after verdict because it shall be  intend saint Michael be in great Woodstreet and judgement be affirm
braithwait for matthews C B a suit can be maintain in the spiritual court for  word which be actionable at commonlaw matthews libel against braithwait in the  spiritual court for have say matthews be a rogue a cheat rogue and keep rogue  company prohibition be grant Lord Raymond er p
Braithwaite against allan hilary geo defendant object to the insufficiency of  plaintiff notice of execute a writ of inquiry of damage with respect to  uncertainty of place the word of the notice be at the usual place at Durham  and obtain a rule to show cause why the inquisition shall not be set aside  upon show cause it appear that for twentyfour year pass and upward the place  videlicet the courthouse where cause be try barn er p and where this writ be  execute have be the know and establish place for execute writ of inquiry two  counsel for defendant attend the execution of this writ and crossexamined  plaintiff witness the rule be discharge prime for defendant will for plaintiff
BRAKINES case mortgagor of socage land pay off the mortgage shall by to point  out de law without petition recover the land which the king have take into  ware with the heir of the mortgagee his tenant in capite mortgagor and  mortgagee in fee of land hold in socage the mortgagee die seize of this land  and of other land hold in chief of the queen his heir within age and this  mortgage be find by office the queen seize the wardship of all the land the  day of payment come and the mortgagor pay the sum accord to the condition to  the executor of the mortgagee and enter during the nonage of the heir quaere  whether he shall answer to the queen for the profit of the land after this  entry until the heir have sue his livery or not but it be hold in a like case  in the court of ware between bower and barn east of queen Elizabeth that the  mortgagor after the payment shall have the land out of the hand of the queen  by a to point out de law upon this matter of record and a suggestion of  payment without be drive to his petition hilary term queen Elizabeth
brand against todd note the difference agree by the court if the king grant to  a all the waste id d after a ad quod damnum return and that the waste contain  acre yet if it contain acre all pass for the grant be general and the ad quod  damnum be to inquire of the damage and not for the quantity of the waste but  if the king grant acre of his waste in d and the ad quod damnum return that it  be not to his damage and that the waste contain acre there nothing passes for  it be uncertain which acre be intend and the party shall not have any election  against the king ail upon evidence to the jury Noy er p
brand case this agree with the former case for the manor of Edwardstone for so  much as concern the first indenture make in Elizabeth and the fine acknowledge  in performance of the covenant therein contain but afterward this case differ  from the former for after the fine so acknowledge of this manor John brand  James do feoff lie one Matthew smith and Henry seek and their heir of the say  manor and all other the say land to the use of himself for life without  impeachment of waste the remainder after his decease of the say manor of  Powlstead and part of the premise to Jacob brand in fee the remainder of the  say premise by several parcel to Samuel and James brand in fee and afterward  the of may last the say John brand die the say John brand now his majesty ware  be his heir as above question whether the say John brand have power to convey  the say manor and land by the say feoff to the use therein express contrary to  the use of the former fine and in who the estate and right of the say manor  and land remain whereupon it be resolve by the lord chief justice and chief  baron lie er p Fleming coke and Tanfield that the say inheritance in fee be in  John brand and that he have power to stand seize to the use of Benjamin and  his heir and that the estate and right of the manor do go accord to the feoff  and use thereupon mich James king
brand contra GIPPS car foe land decree to be sell to supply the personal  estate this court declare that the plaintiff legacy ought to be pay out of the  whole estate of the testator videlicet out of the personal estate so far as  that will extend and if that will not satisfy the same then the testator manor  and land undivided and unsold shall in the next place come in aid of the  personal estate for satisfaction thereof and that if it be not sufficient then  the whole manor land and tenement though sell and divide chancery report shall  notwithstanding such sale and division come in supply thereof in proportion to  be refund and pay by the person or person in who hand soever the same shall be  find
brander versus rob a agreement c for a mortgage by one before his bankruptcy  make void Q see Ch can vern and the case of jacobson c postea the plaintiff be  assignee of commissioner of bankruptcy issue out against one Botville who be a  GunpowderMaker and have contract with the defendant for as much saltpetre as  come to pound but not have ready money to pay for the same propose to make a  mortgage of a estate he have in his own possession by way of security for the  money and in order thereunto leave with the defendant the titledeed to get the  assignment draw the defendant carry the deed to a attorney to look into the  Title and draw the assignment and the attorney keep they by he for Gilbert  some time and then die without have draw the mortgage after which the  defendant carry the deed to a scrivener for the same purpose but before the  assignment be perfect the say Botville become a bankrupt and now the plaintiff  assignee of the commissioner bring his bill to have the deed deliver up that  so the estate may be sell for the satisfaction of creditor the defendant by  his answer insist upon the matter aforesaid his counsel argue that this be  more than a pledge of the write that a assignment be intend to be make and if  it have be make this court will not have take it from he without pay the money  that its not be make be only a accident occasion by the death of the attorney  and this court often relieve against accident and so the plaintiff ought not  to have the deed without payment of the money but the court decree the deed to  be bring before the master and to be deliver by schedule to the plaintiff with  cost though no reason be give for this decree send hoc Dur a many men to have
BRANDLEV and Milbank obligor joint and several error on a judgement in c b the  case be a and b enter into a bind joint and several in which they bind  themselves their heir c a die in debt against his heir he plead that b to  loosen ad diem and it be find against he and judgement enter d general quod  quer recupere debt is owed Hoyl assign d for error that there ought to be a  special judgement and not a general one I cro Poph Jones but admit that blow  Davie versus Pepys be that there shall be a general judgement but the case  before cite and several other be contrary to blow curian the judgement be good  and if it have be as Hoyl will have it it have be ill vide roll title heir  that there ought to be a general judgement in such case unless the plaintiff  pray a special judgement and the chief justice say as to Howyer S case in Poph  that be in a plea to a to know facias and in that case there shall not be a  general judgement because he be there charge as tertenant and the reason of  the difference between the plead of a executor and a heir be because the heir  and the land be bind by the bind but not the executor so judgement shall be  general on nothing to say by the heir and judgement be affirm nisi c but  dolben to stick fast
Brandley versus Milbank mich W m Com error on a judgement in c b the case be a  and b enter into a bind joint and several in which they bind themselves their  heir c a die in debt against his heir be plead that b to loosen ad diem and it  be find against he and judgement enter general quod quer recupere debt is owed  it be assign for error that there ought to be a special judgement and not a  general one I cro Poph Jones but admit that Plowd Davie versus Pepys be that  there shall be a general judgement but the case before cite and several other  be contrary to Plowden curian the judgement be good and if it have be as you  will have it it have be ill vide roll title heir that there ought to be a  general judgement in such case unless the plaintiff pray a special judgement
brandlin versus Millbank debt against a heir and a general judgement be give  he and good show SC comb S c debt against the defendant as heir who plead in  bar that t S who be likewise joint and several bind with his ancestor have pay  the money the plaintiff reply non to loosen upon which they be at issue and  the plaintiff have a verdict and general judgement in c b and now upon a writ  of error in b r it be insist for the plaintiff in error that the judgement  against the heir in this case ought to be special videlicet of the cro Poph W  Jones land descend and not general as here but on the other side it be say  that this point be well settle in blow a king a Davis and Pepy S case with  which the register agree the court refer to roll S Abr title heir where it be  full in this point and that there be several judgement recite and likewise if  a special judgement shall be give in such case it will be error and a  distinction be make between debt and a cognizant fa against the heir upon a  judgement have against his ancestor for if in a cognizant fa the heir plead a  false plea and this find against he yet the judgement shall be of the land  descend only for the execution in such case shall be upon the first judgement  against the ancestor and not upon the judgement in the cognizant fa quod to  have performance because such judgement do not alter or enlarge the first  judgement and so it be adjudge in the case of Poph cro Bulst W Jones palm  Howyer versus rivet the judgement general be affirm
brandon v knight Feb one Wardlow be order to stand commit for marry a ware of  the court without permission a warrant be make out to apprehend he but he can  not be find afterward it be discover he be a prisoner in the Marshalsea for  debt his contempt be criminal not of a civil nature he can not be charge in  custody especial as this court have no jurisdiction over theMarshalsea after  consideration Lord Hardwicke c orderedan habeas corpus cum cause to issue  direct to the marshal of the Marshalsea or his deputy there to bring the say  Wardlow to the bar of this court to answer his contempt Mews dig infant b a
BRANDONSCASE extent upon a statute note if a manor or other signior be extend  upon a statute and a ware fall which be a sufficient value to make  satisfaction of the extent yet this shall not be any satisfaction in tender to  satisfaction insomuch that this be only the fruit of tenure and not like to  cut of tree nor to dig of coal or other over and so coke chief justice that it  have be adjudge and with this agree the book of Edward the manor to make  summons in dower if the land lie in one county and the church in another  county then upon the statute the sheriff ought to come to the next church  though it be in another county and there make proclamation as the auditor in  account ought to commit the accomptants find in arrearage to the next gao and  there ought to be commit though that they be in another county the word of a  patent of a judge of the common bench be as follow that be to say James by the  grace of God and c know that we have constitute Humphrey winch sergeant at law  one of our justice of the common Beneb during our good pleasure with all and  singular vale and fee to the same office belong and appertain in witness of  which c michaelmas James in the common bench
Bransby against hains prerogative court Trinity term June that will of a wife  make on the presumption that her husband be dead revoke dr bettesworth for  Samuel Bransby Margaret Bransby decease make her will describe herself widow  make John hains executor and residuary legatee will date d September lee  Samuel Bransby as husband call in the probate allege he be marry to decease on  that July by licence at Hoxsan chapel we have examine one witness who be  present and have prove cohabitation with reputation for six year in he fix at  Birmingham and she go to service he be inform by her brother that she be dead  that October he marry another woman which be the sole objection to we identity  of person prove both decease and Bransby think each other dead dr pinfold for  John hains the executor decease die in October will be all of decease own  handwriting we deny Bransbys interest admit he have prove his interest but  hope there be no room for cost per curian sentence for the interest but  without cost
BRANTHWAIT versus blackerby all hill will B R for a joint cause of action  against a attorney with another man both must be arrest vide sand case B R S C  vent if a man have a joint cause of action against two one a attorney and the  other not he must arrest both and declare against they as in custody a bill  can be file against a person privilege in vacation a for then he be not  present in court and as to the vacation it begin the last day of the term as  soon as the court rise vide lev vent note the bill must be file though the  attorney agree to appear and dispense with it but it may in such case be file  afterward pasch will B R Robert case a in Waghorne v field t r it be decide  that a bill may in all case be file against a attorney in the vacation vide  Comerford v price Doug lane v wheat ibidem n Salkeld er p anonymous hill Ann  B R disapprove Montague v Harrison c b n S privilege to go Of persons vide  raym lev Andrews h come to confess a indictment and the court hold that he  have no privilege to go Of persons because there be no process against he c c  in Meekins v smith h Bl the court of common plea lie down this general rule  videlicet that all person who have relation to a suit which call for their  attendance whether they be compel to attend by process or not in which number  bail be include be entitle to privilege from arrest to go et Of persons  provide they come good fide
BRASFIELD v lee damage can be give for a injury do after the commencement of  the action in trespass assault battery and false imprisonment the plaintiff  declare that the defendant assault beat and imprison the plaintiff thefirst of  October W and detain he in prison for four month upon not guilty plead verdict  for the plaintiff and entire damage be give by the jury and now sergeant  Darnall move in arrest of judgement that the declaration be a declaration of  Michaelmas term W and therefore the damage be entire and give for the  imprisonment of four month from the first of October it appear that the damage  be give for imprisonment after the action be commence and judgement be arrest
brasington and eire how far a person shall not be allow to take a assignment  of the bailbond by reason that the same person be bail above who be bail to  the sheriff a motion be make to stay the proceed upon a bailbond the reason  that Mr Blincoe give for it be that the same bail be give before a judge as be  take by the sheriff and notwithstanding this the plaintiff have get a  assignment of the bailbond and be now proceed upon it and he say it be  contrary to the practice of the court to allow a assignment in such case Mr  justice page who deliver the opinion of the court the chief justice be absent  say that he have inquire of the master and he find the practice be so and  therefore the proceed be stay
BRATHWHITE against lee variance Yarnly move in arrest of judgement in a action  upon Elizabeth for exercise a trade c because the distringa as I Cr be not in  a action tam pro lord ring how pro he himself as the original be but only  inter b l general Adjornatur Keble er p Keble de boundary consecrated HILLARII  car two b r die Jupiter January year foster chief justice mallet Twisden  Windham
BRATY against Baldock easter geo plaintiff declare de bene be and give notice  to plead in four day though defendant by the rule of the court be entitle to  eight day time to plead plaintiff stay till after the eight day expire before  he sign judgement but the notice be barn ing bad the rule to show cause why  the judgement shall not be set aside be make absolute Skinner for defendant  wright for plaintiff
BRAUGHTON against bennet leet in trespass the defendant justify by amerciament  in court leet which be affeerd to livre and that for that he take the coach  and horse for which the action be bring the plaintiff traverse that she be not  bind to repair the way ration tenure in default whereof the distress be take  judgement si the plaintiff ab action svan close to withhold to which the  defendant demurrer special quod state of siege predict repeat minus sufficient  caret form which per curian on special demurrer be ill and shall be judgement  financial loss svan Himself adjudicar c winnington except that no time be give  to pay the fine send non allocatur this need not be show in justification the  court agree the traverse good and that a lessee for year can be bind ration  tenure for this go to the inheritance but this charge may go along with the  house but then it must be special find who bath the inheritance and who the  particular estate and on cost pay by the plaintiff the court order a new trial
Braxal versus Thorold Trin James in replevin for the take of four ox at  Coringham in the county of Lincoln in a place call Dowgateleys Sep James the  defendant say the place contain four acre in Coringham great which be his  freehold and justify the take damage pheasant the plaintiff in his bar to the  avowry that the place where c lie in a place call Harrerart quarter parcel of  a great common field call e in Coringham aforesaid and that the plaintiff the  say time and long before be seize of one message and of fourteen acre of land  meadow and pasture with the appurtenance to the say message belong and that  the plaintiff and all they who estate the plaintiff have in the tenement ought  to have common and so prescribe to have common for he his farmer and tenant c  for all commonable cattle levant and couchant upon the tenement c and upon  issue take upon the common it be find for the plaintiff and allege in arrest  of judgement that it do not appear by the bar to the avowry in what place the  message and land to which the common do appertain do lie to wit whether it do  lie in Coringbarn or in any other place or county and this of necessity ought  to have be show in certain because the tenure ought to be both of the place  where the house and land do lie and of the place where the land do lie in  which the common be claim and therefore of necessity ought to have be show in  certain and shall not of necessity be intend to be in Coringliam where the  common be for a common may be appendant or appurtenant to land in another  county and the trial shall be of both county and judgement be arrest by the  whole court common when the field acre unsown the sow of parcel shall not  debar he of his common in the residue
Braxton and dyke how far it shall not be necessary that a person shall appear  by attorney this be a action upon the case in the common plea Writ of error be  bring and one error assign be that it be not say that he appear by attorney  but the court say that then they will intend that he appear in person indeed  they admit that if the surname of the attorney have be only mention without  the Christian name there inasmuch as it appear that he come by attorney and  there be no attorney mention that be a good error another error be assign and  that be in the writ of inquiry videlicet that the writ of inquiry be execute  on the day of the return and that it do not appear it execute during the sit  of the court after which time the jurisdiction of the sheriff as to that  purpose cease but this exception the court like Barnardiston king b wise  overrule for they say they will not admit of any fraction in a day
bray against booth mich geo prac ring barn S c judgement hold good though sign  after a non pro BORRET non pro sign for want of a replication to a plea of  tender where the money be not bring into court afterward judgement sign for  want of a plea upon motion to set aside the judgement it be object that the  non pro be good till set aside and therefore judgement irregular but the court  overrule that objection and say the non pro be irregular and therefore of it  be self void upon this motion the prothonotories Mr Thomson and Mr Borret both  affirm that the judgement be good and that the non pro be irregular there be  no occasion to move the court to set it aside
bray against Holtby mich car rot nuisance error of a judgement in action sur  case in hull for nuisance in not repair a gutter between the house of the  plaintiff and defendant after verdict and judgement Jones pro defendant in the  action the plaintiff in the writ of error allege that albeit the plaintiff  house be say within the jurisdiction yet the defendant be only say contigue  adjacent and do not say it be within the jurisdiction but because it be say ad  tunc ibidem the defendant be possess the court hold it well it be not say that  either house be ancient nor any particular prescription in which case the  building of the defendant house or make a gutter be not material where there  be no overhang winnington pro defendant in the writ of error this be a thing  of necessity and for habitation it need not be say ancient as picot against  Surrey Hub robin against barn the court incline that a prescription be  necessary for a curare to become used be not sufficient of a gutter here where  there be two house in variance and it be adjourn albeit it be the best plead  so of a watercourse post
bray against patridge b bring a action upon the case that p sue for tithe and  recover because there be nisi testis one by one to prove the payment when in  truth he have pay it before two but now one be dead and by the court that a  action do not lie because the cause be mere spiritual and for that it differ  from e for there the composition be a temporal contract although it be for  tithe
bray versus ham Trin James rotulo action of the case for these word thou art a  cozen knave and thou baste cozen I in sell false measure in my barley and the  county be bind to curse you for sell with false measure and I will prove it  and thou baste change my barley which I buy of you and the plaintiff set forth  in his declaration that he be bailiff to W c and Brownlow goldsborough h c of  certain land in p for three year and during the say time have the care and  sell of diverse corn and grain grow upon the same land and after trial and  verdict for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement that the action  will not lie but the court be of a contrary opinion and judgement be give for  the plaintiff judgement arrest because the plaintiff omit to show in his  declaration the word be speak of himself
brazier against acton Estople in debt on bind to perform all covenant specify  in a indenture betwixt a and b the defendant plead there be no covenant to  which the plaintiff demurrer and per curian this be general of all be well  contra if it be to perform any certain covenant as to be nonsuit in formedon  he can say there be none contra to be nonsuit in all action pendent in c b but  the party be estopt to say there be no indenture but he must set forth the  indenture it self though he have agree there be such a one Keble for whither  the word in the indenture as deed c do amount unto covenant upon issue that  these be such covenant can never be question but only of fact but the  plaintiff show the indenture if any covenant be therein the jury must find for  the plaintiff and by wile for the plaintiff this be a windlace to make the  bind void for if there be real no indenture which the defendant be bind to  show the plaintiff shall be put to show it Adjornatur
breach against child bail Bulst pl Thomas pray bail may be admit in and quer  ground on release of administrator on execution by the plaintiff as executor  on to know facias which the court deny till it appear how it stand in the  spiritual court but on show the administration the court will cause the  executor to show it repeal but per curian the release on which the bail be  ground must be such as may discharge the judgement which this can do as to  executor
breach of covenant be triable at law for a court of equity can settle damage  march Stafford and mayor of London ms Rep vin Abr pl SC accord p wms S c
bread against crying Euhan ante admiral Glyn attend the court with precedent  in the admiralty of such bind of stipulation in sum certain and Tr car  Burroughs against Blofield this point be adjudge that no prohibition shall go  but the court remember not the case in h there as all downard have be be  fidejusserunt in mark de judgment stop judge to loosen the condemnation which  be but pro form and the proceed only like to know facias against the party be  not like recognizance or bind but as stipulation make in any court whatsoever  whither of record or not and have it be bind or recogn the court will have  award a prohibition but as this ease be per curian shall we grant prohibition  we shall overthrow the whole court
break v Stapleton the defendant bring a action of trespass against the plain  for come to his house to serve Subpna and stay by injunction the plaintiff go  to the defendant house to serve he with a Subpna out of this court for which  come over his ground and enter into his house the defendant bring a action of  trespass against the plaintiff quare house enclosed space to break in pieces  and upon motion of sergeant walmesly the action of trespass be stay by  injunction break plaintiff Stapleton defendant year Elizabeth
bream against darnel force Keeling pray rerestitution because the justice  below grant restitution after tender of a traverse on quash the indictment of  the force and per curian it be grant sir William Bouls case of Windsor because  if the party tender traverse by the session follow the force restitution grant  before ought to be supersede and the court will not meddle with the title on  either side
BREAMER versus Thornton elsewhere in a bill for tithe for the year the  defendant by their answer set forth a agreement make ten year ago between the  plaintiff and the defendant and other the parishioner of the say parish to  take S d in the pound for every pound rend of land within the parish as long  as they shall live together and he continue parson and that they have constant  pay it accord and that by the say agreement the payment be to be make upon the  saint day of may and the saint day of November yearly and it appear that the  plaintiff have not give notice that be retract the say agreement or dissent  from it after the saint day of may and per curian this agreement will not bind  the parson be by parole but it will excuse the parishioner of the penalty and  damage give by the statute of Edward and from cost till notice give of his  dissent from the agreement and that notice give after payment become due be  too late and that it be too late if give after the land be Hardres er p manure  and sow because perhaps if notice have be give before Hardres he will not have  be at so great charge upon they or not have sow they at all and the court  desire the party to agree et adjornatur
Brearton v eaton perjury in make oath for impotency one of the same name sue  for it and discharge oath be make in the name of one Edward Jones that the  defendant Eaton be sick and the rest impotent and not able to travel whereupon  a commission be award to take their answer in the country now Edward Jones of  Ruthin be call up at the plaintiffs suit by process for perjury and allege he  be not the Darti that make the oath and bring a certificate to justify he be  at Ruthin when they oath be take and therefore he be dismiss Brearton  plaintiff Eaton wife other defendant year Elizabeth caryi er p
Brearton v roberts attachment discharge by supersedeas pay the ordinary fee  the defendant be serve with a subpoena at the suit of Hanmer and for want of a  bill get cost and the plaintiff upon affidavit that the defendant be serve  with a subpoena at his suit get a attachment against the defendant whereupon  he be apprehend and return faint it be order that the attachment be discharge  by supersedeas the defendant pay twenty shilling and sixpence to the warden of  the fleet and the ordinary charge to the plaintiff Brearton plaintiff bee  Robert defendant year Elizabeth
breast con offley car f the testator desire in his will his executor to give  the plaintiff pound it be a good legacy the suit be touch a legacy of pound  give by the will of John Wynn to the plaintiff of which will he make his wife  the plaintiff sister executrix who since have marry the defendant Offley his  executrix but the defendant refuse to pay the say legacy the defendant insist  that the testator make such will and thereby desire his executrix the  defendant to give the plaintiff pound but leave it whole to the say defendant  own free will how when and in what manner foe dispose of it to he and the  defendant chancery report insist she ought not to be question for the same in  this court it not be the intention of the testator to make the defendant  liable to the plaintiff suit for the same but do own asset in case the court  adjudge the payment of the say legacy in any other manner than be direct by  the will this court be satisfy that the say legacy of pound be due and Payable  from the defendant to the plaintiff and decree the same to be pay accord
BREDDON against prettiman TR car rot consideration Siderf pl modern pl in a  action sur case in consideration the plaintiff will procure any to take his  oath in write that such money be receive the defendant promise to pay and be  aver that he procure I S to take his oath before sir William bird master of  chancery which as Inst be no legal oath its no consideration and for that  cause he special demurrer and to this Twisden incline but per Keeling and  Moreton this be a sufficient oath for a consideration in contract though do  before private man or of his own head as hill Elizabeth Cr knight against  Rushworth though no perjury be assignable but on a judicial oath and mich  Perkins against binks in consideration the plaintiff will come before a master  in chancery and swear the defendant owe so much money he will pay the  judgement be pro plaintiff as Jones say who be there as here pro plaintiff and  have the oath be in this court or in chancery all be one here be then no suit  begin also this oath be sufficient to be make in the action and so the  averment be immaterial as proof general be intend in the same action which  Twisden agree and that to take a oath before such a master of chancery be a  good consideration because not unlawful but here there be no oath in certain  appoint therefore it must be intend legal but by Keeling there be no man  certain here appear have power to give a oath and therefore this must be  intend of a solemn and not slight oath and doubtless any man may take a  voluntary or take a solemn oath on special occasion also by Moreton this be  but a oath of information Adjornatur
BREDGALL and LASHINGTON c pasch car two rot payment in to know facias against  the defendant as bail of tower they plead that the principal pay the money on  the first judgement to which the plaintiff demurrer per curian the principal  can plead payment but the bail may for the acquittance belong not to he as  recognition by a that I S shall pay money on judgement the party shall not  plead payment without acquittance but a may but the payment after the  judgement and before the to know facias be not good in time no more than death  of principal after cap rest and before to know facias also on covenant to pay  l by single bill in debt payment can be plead without a acquittance but on  another specialty to pay the same l by the party or a stranger payment be  pleadable without any deed or acquittance and the court order the party to  take issue on payment
Bredon versus gill mich will B R ld raym S c entry ld raym see S C ld raym  with note commissioner of appeal can proceed upon the deposition take before  commissioner of excise but must examine the witness de to make new unless dead  see Mod S C Chan Cas Chan Cas salk c Mod Mod comb on a appeal from the  commissioner of excise to the commissioner of appeal accord to car c the  question be whether the deposition of the witness and their examination write  down by the clerk of the commissioner of excise shall be allow to be read in  evidence on this appeal or whether the witness shall not be bring in again  personal and be examine viva voice the commissioner of appeal think the  deposition sufficient and proceed thereupon and a prohibition be move for but  deny at first because this have be the course ever since the statute and it be  a summary proceed that it will occasion trouble and delay to the revenue to  bring in all the witness again and it be but proper the commissioner of appeal  shall have just the same evidence the first commissioner have so it be in a  attaint and the law do not make viva voce evidence necessary unless before a  jury in other case deposition may be evidence if it be not so in this case  they will be to try the matter de to make new instead of try a appeal say  postea pasch W b b mulata opinion the court hold that the commissioner of  appeal ought to examine the witness de to make new on the appeal that it be  the intent of the Act and the commissioner have a power give for that purpose  to administer oath that this be just because the first sentence may be by  default or the deposition may misrepresent or not represent the whole case and  that on appeal upon order of justice examination be always de to make new and  a prohibition be grant but holt c j say his private opinion be that if the  witness be dead they may use their deposition vide Faresl the transferbooks of  the Eastlndia company allow as evidence c Salkeld property
Bredon who tam vers harnan at guildhall in person Eyre c I de c b a former  recovery not to be give in evidence on nil debet in a who tam strange pro quer  action who tam for not register article of apprenticeship accord to the stamp  Act the defendant plead nil debet and upon the trial he offer in evidence a  record of a recovery against he for the same forfeiture by another person and  so endeavour to discharge himself by this under the plea of nil debet and it  be insist for he that if it appear that there be a recovery against he by  another person for the same forfeiture he be thereby discharge against all man  and owe nothing upon that account and therefore it be very proper to give this  record in evidence upon nil debet strange but Eyre c I deny this record to be  give in evidence and say the defendant ought to have plead it if he will take  advantage of it for if it have be plead the plaintiff will have be at liberty  to have reply nul tiel record or that it be a recovery by fraud to defeat a  real prosecutor which he can not be prepare to show upon this issue
bree against sailor accord in action sur case sur indebitatus the defendant  plead a accord to pay money to a stranger and aver part pay and a special  promise for the rest to which the plaintiff demurrer because not execute  winnington contra on Edward Com that there be sufficient remedy it be well  enough send non allocatur for albeit a obligation give for the money be  sufficient be a payment yet not a promise unless the agreement be that be  promise to pay and judgement pro plaintiff
breers and boulton Wednesday may ante power in replevin the defendant avow on  power to grant annuity to daughter marry or unmarried agree to be pay for  marriage portion that Roger who have the power give to the defendant wife l  and after grant the annuity by the power mary breers marry boulton the avowant  special verdict find agreement by grandmother to give l in absence of mary and  without mention of marriage and if this be a marriageagreement within power  for the defendant holt for the plaintiff here be no discourse of marriage  previous it can be no marriageportion also the power be to grant for raise a  portion of so until l raise be not good no more than estate for two life on  power to lease for three life also this Keble grant after marriage will not be  sufficient execution of the power without agreement precedent levins contra  the grant be in the word of the power and in Bridgmans time in chancery a  lease for ten year be hold good on power to lease for twenty one year Anders  pl Inst   whistler case also the issue here be on the agreement and its find  Roger agree to give for a provision and that this deed be in pursuance thereof  and its find the marriageportion be unpay at the testator death which the  court agree and judgement for the defendant and so by Jones and Twisden on the  statute of lease otherwise than for three life or year a lease for less be  good
BREERTONS case in a account against b judgement be give quod to sum up and  before the auditor he make a uncertain account and be commit till he have make  a full and perfect account and after b be deliver by privilege of parliament  process be pray to retake b and to bring he again into the court and it be  think not to be within the statute of James because b be not in execution not  for any certain duty and by the court a new cap ad reckon shall not issue for  then all that be do before the first auditor will be annul as I e b but a  special writ shall issue recite all the matter and to bring he again into  court and be there he shall be commit to prison by the court there to remain  until c ut above which be do accord
brell and brown c against Richard ante error on oat and Ayliffe car Weston  pray judgement may be reverse whole for nonage of some roll also the writ of  error as Bardwell and grant be but a commission they may join for by reversal  of the judge Keble mean which must be against all the party shall be restore  against all which the court agree and the case cite and hale Ch just say a  writ of error to reverse judgement against a pe covert and other be total  reverse and the ad damnum may be of those convict or of all but if there be  several judgement one may be reverse and the other stand and judgement be  whole reverse by this joint writ of error
brell versus Richard keb error upon a judgement in the common plea in a  ejectment against eight defendant and the writ be ad grave financial loss Self  the judgement be only against three and the other five be acquit the error be  assign in the nonage of the three it be move whether the writ of error be well  bring or whether the judgement shall be reverse in toto the court resolve that  the writ be good though it may be also ad damnum only of those convict but be  only in the nature of a commission whereby the king command the error to be  examine this matter be not material Ventris and Twisden say that the constant  practice be for all to join and they all hold that the judgement ought to be  reverse against all
Brereton and Monington Trin car banc Reg error to reverse a judgement give in  a inferior court a writ of error be bring to reverse a judgement give in a  inferior court and the error assign be that the plaint be enter against  Francis and the proceed be against John roll justice say that it be not good  for a plaint be in the nature of a original writ and therefore if that be  erroneous it can be help though it be after a verdict and therefore show cause  Saturday next why the judgement shall not be reverse style report er p
Brereton v do an ancient deity upon motion make to have the cause dismiss into  the county palatine of Chester where the party dwell because it appear to this  court that in this suit have former continue against the same defendant they  offer to bring into this court certain bind concern the matter now demand and  to set down upon their oath the surplusage of good remain in their hand  therefore it be here retain Brereton wife plaintiff do wife defendant year  Elizabeth
Brereton v tamberlain vesey senior supplement er report date vesey senior  supplement two attorneygeneral versus Brereton and Brereton versus tamberlain  July Reg lib a fol see page the order make be as follow whereupon c and the  court have propose to the party in these cause whether any of they be desirous  to try any of the question arise in these cause at law and the counsel for all  party decline to try the same at law his lordship do declare that the curacy  or chapel of flint be a perpetual curacy and that the nomination of a curate  to the say chapel belong to the vicar of the parish of Worthop for the time be  and his successor in that vicarage and that the curate so nominate be licence  by the bishop of saint Asaph for the time be be not removable at the pleasure  of the vicar of W but have a right to hold such curacy for such time and in  such manner as other perpetual curate have by law a right to hold their curacy  and therefore upon the original information do order and decree that the right  of the relator r t to the say curacy with its appurtenants and to all revenue  profit and duty thereunto belong or therewith usual enjoy be establish I  accord to the declaration aforesaid the charitable benefaction vesey senior  supplement of pound per annum to the curate be also establish and possession  of the chapel be order to be deliver to the relator a account of the profit  direct c the right of the vicar the plaintiff in the cross cause and of his  successor to nominate a curate of the say perpetual curacy of f on all vacancy  thereof be establish the cross bill be dismiss as to all other matter two of  the defendant be to be pay their cost but none be give on either side as  between the other party Reg lib fool
BRERY Oui tam v levy a popular indictment not to be compound after conviction  indictment b on the coal Act for sell short measure defendant be find guilty  after which Wallace move for leave to compound with the prosecutor but his  motion be deny for the king moiety of the penalty be vest by the conviction  and then it be too late to compound c b this must be incorrect it must have be  a who tam action and not a indictment c see brown Q t v Bailey burr wood Q t v  Ellis post and wood Q t v Johnson post
BRESSENDEN contra decreet heir executor Laurence owmer be indebt by judgement  and seize of land thereto liable of the value of pound per Ann die intestate  Charles a infant be his heir Rebecca his wife take Administration and possess  the personal estate and enter as guardian on the land and receive the profit  two year and make the defendant grace decreet her executrix and charge it she  also enter as guardian and possess the personal estate of Laurence and Rebecca  Charles die the plaintiff Bressenden his heir be compel to pay pound on the  judgement the defendant take out Administration of Charles his estate the  scope of the plaintiff bill be for repayment of the money but the defendant  plead her Administration to Charles and thereby to be discharge of any account  of the estate of Charles and demurrer because no administrator de good non be  party the Lord keeper opinion be that the profit take by the guardian shall be  liable to make satisfaction to the plaintiff but the personal estate in  Rebecca hand be liable in the first place in case of the heir to which the  administrator de good non be liable and in that respect he hold the bill ill  and give the plaintiff leave to amend the bill in that point
bret against partridge by his deed compound for tithe and after sue for they  in the spiritual court by Popham and gawdy that a action upon the case lie see  e m James the lady waterhouse be sue for the tithe of tree whereof none be due  c there a action upon the case do not lie for the person may well be ignorant  of what thing be due otherwise where be sue against his own knowledge  Sharpless case in the exchequer be vouch a have recover in debt against b in  the common bench and know that b be resident in Middlesex cause he to be  outlaw in London by proclamation there and adjudge a action Noy on the case  lie but at that time the first case be adjourn
bret and BAGILL new judgement on a former for plaintiff reverse in replevin if  the judgement for the plaintiff be reverse such new judgement must be give as  the court shall have give before which can be for the avowant unless upon the  merit of the avowry and if that be nought it must only be nil cap per billam
bret and HILLARS how far a defect in a declaration shall be say to be cure  after a verdict by car cap in a writ of error upon a judgement in the common  plea exception be take to the declaration for that the defendant name be use  instead of the plaintiff in the principal part of it for as it stand there the  benefit be lie to be to the plaintiff and not the defendant and yet that the  defendant promise the court say as this be only robertus instead of rogerus  and it be right in the other part of the declaration it be help by the statute  of car cap vide side Mod salk Mod salk n b skin cro Barnardiston king b er p
bret and johnson S case mandamus to restore diverse commoncouncilman Mr  Harrington move for a mandamus to the mayor and citizen of Chester to restore  Richard bret Thomas Johnson and seven other to their office of the common  council there and it be grant Comberbach de term consecrated mich year William  nariae king queen in b r
bret and ware note upon evidence to a jury between bret and ware upon the  dissolution of a vicarage in the county of Warwick which be part of the priory  of dantry where the pope by his bull give to the vicar minute Decimus et  alteragum and it be certify by the doctor that alteragum will pass to the  vicar tithe wool c and the usage be show in evidence and the copy of the pope  bull and the court will not credit that without see the bull it self and so  the plaintiff be nonsuit and the jury be discharge
bret versus Averder mich Elizabeth debt bring upon a obligation to perform a  arbitrament the defendant confess the arbitrament but plead in bar that the  plaintiff do not require he to make payment and to that plea the plaintiff  demurrer and it be adjudge no plea for the defendant at his peril ought to  make payment and the plaintiff ought not to make a request if part of a  condition be to be perform within the realm and part without ought to be  triable here hale versus bell Trin Elizabeth rotulo the plaintiff bring a  action of debt upon a obligation with a condition for the payment of within  fourteen day next after the return of one Russel into England from the city of  Venice and then the obligation shall be void the defendant plead in bar that  the say Russel be not at Venice upon which plea the plaintiff demurrer and  adjudge a naughty plea for where part be to be do within the realm and part  out of the realm the plea ought to be triable within the realm defendant plead  six judgement in bar and two find to be by fraud and judgement for the  plaintiff
bret versus cumberland whether covenant lie against the executor of a lessee  after assignment in a writ of covenant the case be thus queen Elizabeth by her  letter patent make a lease of certain mill render rend in which lease Popham  be these word to wit that the say lessee his executor administrator and assign  shall from time to time repair the mill and so leave they at the end of the  term the lessee assign over his term the queen also grant over the reversion  the first lessee die and the grantee of the reversion bring a writ of covenant  against his executor in which Popham er p case there be two point whether  these word and the say lessee his executor administrator and assign shall from  time to time c make a covenant or no whether as this case be it will lie  against the executor of the lessee as to the first point it be agree that it  be a covenant for be by indenture it be the word of both party and it be more  strong be in the case of the queen Haughton say that h title covenant covenant  will lie against a lessee after assignment but debt lie not for rend after the  lessee have accept the assignee for his tenant and therefore it seem that by  the express word of the covenant that the action lie Doderidge justice contra  for between the queen and the lessee there be privity of contract and also of  estate so that the queen her heir and successor may have have a action against  the lessee or his executor upon the privity of contract and where the lessee  assign over the privity of contract remain but the privity of estate be go to  the assignee and now when the queen grant over the reversion the privity of  contract be utter determine whereby the action of covenant can be maintain  against the first lessee or his executor who be more remote to which Montague  chief justice agree see h h and   lib walker case and the judgement there cite  et adjournatur the same term in the same court
breton versus coal mich W Skinn in trespass for take the plaintiff beast by  virtue of a to lift up facias de exit terrae upon a inquisition of outlawry it  appear that the beast be levant and couchant on the land and the point in  question be if upon such a writ of to lift up facias the beast of a stranger  may be take and sell holt c j and court the beast of the plaintiff be find  upon the land may be take by the to lift up facias for there be a express  authority and command to the sheriff to levy the annual value of the land and  the beast be levant and couchant be the issue of the land which be not  restrain by statute to beast of the owner only and the land be debtor to the  king so that if the beast of a stranger shall be exempt the king will be  defeat for he have no remedy against the party by seize the land and therefore  he have it by to lift up facias but where issue of land be forfeit the whole  inheritance be charge because the land be the debtor and no to lift up facias  issue but in such case and in all case where the land be debtor the beast of a  stranger be as liable as of the owner as in the common case of rend and if it  be so in the case of a subject there be no reason why any difference shall be  make in the case of the king holt KB libel
brett at the suit OF Wadham c b affidavit of service of a rule with a  allocatur of cost and a demand thereof on or about such a day be insufficient  a motion be make for a attachment for nonpayment of S cost accord to a rule  upon a plaintiff for that purpose and the prothonotarys allocatur upon a  affidavit that on or about the that day of February last he serve the rule  with the allocatur and demand the cost of the plaintiff who refuse to pay the  same per curian the affidavit be insufficient for the word on or about leave  the day of the service and demand uncertain and it may be upon a Sunday for  any thing that appear to the contrary which be die non assize towns so you  must mend the affidavit for there be no rule to show cause in this case but a  attachment go at once if the affidavit be sufficient
Bretton against barnet mich Elizabeth a man deliver money to I S to be  redeliver to he when he shall be require which I S refuse and therefore a  action of debt be bring and the defendant demurrer for that a action of debt  will not lie but a account as in the Edward Walmseley a action of debt will  very well lie and he take a difference between good and money for if a horse  be deliver to be redeliver there the property be not alter and therefore a  detinue lie for they be good know but if money be deliver it can be know and  therefore the property be alter and therefore a debt will lie and if portugals  or other money that may be know be deliver to be redeliver a detinue lie Owen  and Glanville agree to this and Glanville cite a judgement give in Hilary term  wherein he be of council which be that a man deliver money to another to buy  certain thing for he and be do not buy they the party may bring ail action of  debt but he say that the plaintiff ought to aver that the defendant have not  redeliver they and judgement be give for the plaintiff mich Elizabeth
Bretton against prettiman TR car rot ante assumpsit in consideration the  plaintiff will procure I S to take his oath in write that the sum allege to be  due to the plaintiff be the same as on a account between they the defendant  promise to pay and per curian Windham absentee this be a good consideration be  the oath before a master of chancery or before any man live this be intend of  a solemn oath judgement pro plaintiff
Bretton versus prettiman assumpsit Danv Abr p side keb in assumpsit the  plaintiff declare that the defendant promise that in consideration that the  plaintiff will take a oath that money be due to he he will pay he and the  plaintiff aver that he swear before a master in chancery the defendant  demurrer and adjudge for the plaintiff because it shall be intend a  affirmation upon solemn protestation and not such ail oath for which he may be  indict cro Elizabeth knight versus Rushworth mich Perkins versus Binck in  consideration the plaintiff will come before a master in chancery and swear he  will pay and adjudge for the plaintiff and here the subject matter expound the  thing vide Mod Rep any versus Andrews a week before this term sir Robert  Bernard sergeant at law die who be a baronet and of the county of Huntington  Raymond sir t term trin car b r this term be very defective in business and  therefore I do not attend above two or three day in which no case remarkable  occur except the case follow court presentment be in a leet in Westminster  against diverse person for use several trade have not serve as apprentice for  seven year accord to the statute of the that of Elizabeth and upon this  presentment benet chief bailiff of this liberty will have levy S a month upon  they and they remove the presentment by certiorari and it be now debate if the  leet have conusance of such thing by the last clause of Elizabeth cap and it  seem not because the offence there mention and the court shall be expound  reddendo one one
BRETTS case debt on a bind Brett bring a action of debt on a bind against  Averden and the condition of the bind be to stand to the arbitrement of I S  who do award that the defendant Owen er p shall pay To give back to Brett and  no time be limit to pay it the defendant confess the arbitrament but plead in  bar that the plaintiff have not require he to pay the money and the plaintiff  hereupon demurrer adjudge by the court that it be no good plea for the  defendant at his peril ought to pay the money and the plaintiff need not make  any request wherefore judgement be give for the plaintiff trin Elizabeth in  Com ban
brew against row ante Siderf pl tax winnington insist on it that be find that  the defendant be a officer and seize good on suspicion that custom be not pay  dam a surveyor have colour so to do though it be find that the duty be real  pay yet not be find he know thereof this demand on   be no sufficient  conversion to charge the defendant in trover the condemnation in the exchequer  though the certificate of payment be necessary yet do bind the right till take  off be a judgement Polyxphen the verdict show no cause of suspicion also the  verdict find he convert express to the king use and his own also the  information in the exchequer affect not the good Keble Keeling say the  defendant shall have plead special that he seize on suspicion until he be  satisfy the custom be pay but this be no plea to the conversion also the jury  have not doubt but that there be a conversion and the information in the  exchequer do but aggravate that tort that be before commit but if the  exchequer have sell to a stranger on condemnation afterward it will have  excuse he but not the tortfesors which Windham agree and as sheriff must seize  good at his peril and not because he suspect they to be the good of the  defendant also the sesing carry away and yet detain as be find be a sufficient  conversion of it self which be but aggravate by the demand Twisdem ad idem  this be as gross a actual conversion as can be as take my hat off my head  which need not be demand all agree that on his suspicion he may keep they safe  where he seize they but can carry they away judgement for the plaintiff
brewer against cook amendment on judgement to recover livre a know fa go  against the bail of judgement livre and whether this be amendable in prejudice  of the bail who judgement be livre which error be perceive execution be take  only of livre and now sir William Scroggs oppose the amendment in prejudice of  the bail albeit it be amendable as to the principal and per curian a new know  fa be order and the money take in execution supersede and restore
brewer against matthews in trespass declaration be deliver so late last term  that defendant have not time to move to plead double but to prevent judgement  plead book property plaintiff barn er p reply and defendant demurrer plaintiff  apply for leave to amend the replication and defendant to withdraw his plea  and plead non cul and book property a rule be make to show cause upon  defendant motion and afterward discharge the plead be contradictory where the  locus in quo be ascertain by the declaration as in this case book property be  no plea it be only necessary where the trespass be lie general to put  plaintiff upon make a new assignment No affidavit be produce to verify that  defendant case require both plead for his defence Bootle pro plaintiff win pro  defendant
brewster v capper misnomer plead after special imparlance SC I will defendant  plead a misnomer in abatement after a imparlance a but it appear on the record  to be thus enter and a b who be arrest by the name of ac come c which the  court hold tantamount to a special imparlance on the authority of Keilw b b  judgement for the defendant a it appear from will that the plaintiff demurrer  he may have sign judgement have apply to the court by motion to set aside the  plea or have reply the imparlance by uva of estoppel Tidds prac ed see Lloyd v  William m S Blackstone er p b this case have be overrule in doughty v  Lascelles TR per curian such a plea can only be receive after a special  imparlance which shall be state on the record as to imparlances see grant v  Lord sondes post Mellor v walker wms sand e n in KB a special imparlance be  only grant by leave of the court obtain by a sideBar rule in c p it be grant  as a matter of course by the prothonotary within the first four day of the  term subsequent to that of the declaration Blackstone easter term Geo two K B
brewster versus capper b r what shall be a special imparlance in plead  misnomer in abatement defendant plead a misnomer in abatement which be after a  imparlance thus at which day come ham John crapper the defendant true name who  be sue by the name of John capper c to which the plaintiff demurrer and object  that this plea be in abatement ought to have be Wilson king bench plead of the  same term with the declaration or after a special imparlance and that this be  after a general imparlance but per curian this imparlance by the true name be  special for this purpose but if he have say go for sale predict John capper it  have be have for that will have confess that John capper be the true name  Keilw b judgement for the defendant
brewster versus KITCHEL hill will B R vide the state and resolution of this  case title covenant pl page tax in general mean parliamentary Mod S C comb S C  salk S C S C Carth salk case B R holt different manner of tax and when  introduce in the debate of this case it be lie down by holt c j that the word  tax general speak with reference to a freehold or where the subject matter  will bear Salkeld er p it shall be intend parliamentary tax near excellence h  Quinzim but there be other tax not parliamentary as repair of church  commission of sewer for any imposition which take away part of his good or  rend be a tax Inst the ancient way of tax be by ten and fifteen then by  subsidy after that by royal aid at last by a poundrate the former be all on  the person or personal estate and be much the same thing the latter Salkeld be  upon rend and land ten and fifteen be the most ancient vide Spelman word  Quindecima in Edward a valuation be make on all the town in England and return  into the exchequer which become the stand measure for tax Inst from this when  a tax be give the officer of the exchequer can easy compute what each town be  to be charge with and what it come to vide h bro Quinz the first subsidy be in  and by h cap which be a tax upon the person for his land and good Payable by  the party where he live this continue till car the assessment or tax accord to  a poundrate come in car in these assessment there be a clause to empower the  tenant to deduct so it be in and then and upon this account it be that in  conveyance it come to be provide that there shall be no deduction for tax
brian against stone mich banc sit p for a attachment stone move the court for  a attachment against Brian and other for that he be arrest by a latitat out of  this court in the county of wilts and thence carry into the town of Malborow  and there arrest by a sergeant of that town by a writ out of that corporation  and the plaintiff proceed there against he upon that writ and not upon the  latitat by which he be first arrest which be a contempt to this court the  court rule the party shall have a attachment nisi c and also shall have a  habeas corpus cum causan
brian against Twin Pasc banc sup arrest of judgement in a action for word a  action upon the case be bring for speak these word of the plaintiff you be a  whore and have play the whore with so many man you can number they upon not  guilty plead and a verdict for the plaintiff it be move in arrest of judgement  that the word be not actionable for the say the party have play the whore be  word incertain and do not enforce any act of whoredom to be do by her but  lerman justice absente Roll chief justice give judgement for the plaintiff for  he say the word shall be construe to a common intendment the court be move for  judgement upon a verdict give year since and the cause stay till now by the  committee of indedadamnity but it be deny because it be the last day of the  term notam
briat and gyll at guildhall action upon the case be bring for money receive to  the use of the plaintiff the defendant will have give in evidence upon non  assumpsit that the money be condemned upon a common attachment within the city  of London the which be oppose because the condemnation be after the action  commence in the court above to which it be answer that though it be after the  action commence yet it be before non assumpsit plead and so well enough non  Skinner er p allocatur for the difference be where the condemnation be before  the action commence there the defendant may plead non assumpsit and give the  attachment in evidence but where the condemnation be after the action commence  the defendant ought to plead it
brice against car Emerson and other executor OF I S common plead covenant lie  on a write by which the defendant covenant to be Accountable for SC I keb  covenant on a write seal by which the defendant testator acknowledge himself  to be Accountable for all such money as shall be charge by he on a to be pay  to b and say that he charge so much on a to be pay to b and that he have not  pay it for which he bring this action against the defendant his executor and  it be move by sergeant Bernard that covenant do not lie on such word in a deed  but it ought to be account and cite I cro gury against reason and though now  account lie not against executor yet that shall not be turn into covenant  against the executor which be not a covenant against the testator but by the  court it well lie and so will it do on any word in a deed purport a agreement  for the payment of money then he move that there be not any notice give how  much the money be and that it be not pay over but thereto the court answer  that he have undertake it and the person be certain so that he can inform  himself and the agreement levinz not be to pay it on notice the defendant be  oblige to take notice himself and give judgement for the plaintiff
brice against cur Trin car rot covenant Hitch pl Seiles pl Leonard Godbolt pl  h may have debt or covenant at election on covenant to pay money so Edward pl  when covenant be to pay money its a single bill but if it be to pay money on  the delivery of any thing a accord be a good plea mich in baker against  Llenial this be the proper remedy for account lie only against the receiver  Edward b pl a obligation give for money state on account before auditor do  extinct it contra of a parole to pay such money Edward b pl action of covenant  the plaintiff declare upon a write of the defendant testator acknowledge  himself to be Accountable to the plaintiff for whatever money the plaintiff  shall charge upon I S Payable to sir t V and by Bernard in arrest of judgement  a action of account proper lie and not covenant for money so deliver but per  curian there be no other remedy against executor and have it be against the  party himself such agreement be by one person to pay money charge upon I S for  which a account lie not he be not Chargeable as receiver or baily the only  remedy be by covenant and its not like geens and reason case I Cr No notice be  give by the plaintiff to Dixon who upon such bill be to pay to sir t viner  which per curian be not necessary judgement for the plaintiff
BRICKENDINE against DENWOOD it be find upon a special verdict that the parson  of the parish man es a collector of tithe and that a have licence a  parishioner to carry away his corn without set forth of tithe by the court  clear that licence be void we e Plou that a collector of rend can make a  acuittance and discharge they and a consultation be award
BRICKNER against lock heir pl simile on dyer b Poph Trin car c b roll Stoddalt  against the countess of Leicester where the difference be declare between a  faux plea and a nothing to say or non sum shape powis pray that judgement be  against a heir general de good not common with others on nothing to say may be  set aside the opinion on Pepis case be deny by all those book but Jones oppose  it because the law be that the judgement may be general but this be question  on the admission of bail on utlary after judgement the court incline that the  heir shall set forth the asset and order the bail to be accept not only for  the utlary but for the principal debt which be livre on obligation and leave  this to be discuss on the writ of error
BRICKWOOD a attorney versus fanshaw hill W m b r rot the statute concern  atorneys and their fee do not extend to fee for prosecute in inferior court  show SC salk assumpsit for atorneys fee in which the plaintiff declare special  upon a prosecution of a writ of habeas corpus cum causan to remove a plaint  levy against the defendant fanshaw by one t S in a inferior court videlicet  maiden court in Essex and also for defend in that suit after it be remove here  in b r the defendant plead the statute James cap show before James by which  this enact that a attorney shall not be allow any fee lie out for counsel  unless he have ticket thereof sign by the hand of they who receive such fee  and aver that the plaintiff have not produce to he the defendant any ticket  for the fee of counsel c under their hand as he ought and upon a demurrer to  this plea the plaintiff have judgement because this statute do not extend to  matter transact in inferior court but only to suit in the court of  westminsterhall quod notam
bridewel precinct case hill W Carthew a apprentice for seven year to a master  of bridewel hospital be out of his time set up his trade in ClerkeDWel where  he marry and have child and now be Chargeable to that parish be by the order  of two justice send to the precinct of bridewel as the place of his last legal  settlement the order recite that bridewel be extraparochial and for that  reason this order be quash because the statute concern settlement of the poor  do not extend to extra parochial place but that be casus to let go say per  holt c j extraparochial place may be tax by way of contribution in aid of a  parish overcharge with the poor holt KB er p
bridge against cage Intr h James c b a sheriff bring a action upon the case  for upon a assumpsit for extend of land upon a elegit and judgement quod  nothing cap per breve by the statute h which avoid that and in that case by  just walmsly that if a sheriff execute a extent he shall have his fee accord  to that when it shall be levy and not accord to the debt or duty recover but  other sheriff sue a execution who take the body of the party and that  Elizabeth c b by the court that if one sheriff extend land and before the  delivery to the recoverer he be remove and the succeed sheriff deliver it the  last sheriff shall have the fee lege word stat Elizabeth cap
bridge against raimond in debt upon a obligation to pay a lesser sum the  defendant plead tender at the day and place c and the plaintiff take issue  upon the tender which be find against he and now he pray to have the money out  of the court but it be deny for he have lose that advantage by take issue upon  the tender and that he be too covetous and by seek to gain all be have lose  all we e
bridge and mill be case a action upon the case be bring for speak of these  word videlicet thou inue do the plaintiff have ravish a woman twice and I will  make you stand in a while eel or it henden sergeant move inarrest of judgement  that the action will not lie for the word for he say that by the commonlaw  rape be not felony but trespass v Stamford but now by the statute of west cap  it be make felony and he say that the late wonder ords videlicet stand in a  white sheet do mitigate the former word by reason that in the former word the  word JelonO be omit as the case be in c par Barhams case where the word thou  do burn nky barn and do not say my barn full of corn nor that it be parcel of  his mansionhouse and therefore the action will not lie for unless the barn be  full with corn or part of a dwellinghouse it be not felony like unto Humfq ies  case adjudge in the CommonPleas where a action upon the case be bring for  these word thou have ickd my p pocket and take away ten shilling and it be  adjudge that the action will not lie for he do not say that he have steal ten  shilling but if he have say nothing but thou have pick nq pocket then the  action will have be maintainable lie and dodderidge justice by the commonlaw  rape be felony and in the say statute the worCfelony be not although it he use  in the indictment it be adjourn but the opinion of the court seem to he that  the action will lie for the word Godbolt pasch James in the star chamber
bridge and nichols case they be indict for the not repair of such a bridge and  the indictment wag dehent solent to get again Pontus c it be move that the  indictment be insufficient because it be not allege in the indictment that the  bridge be over a water and not needful that it he amend second it do not  appear in the indictment that at the time of the indictment the say bridge be  ruinous and decay three the indictment be that bridge and Nichols Wehent  solent to get again Pontus and it be not show that their charge of repair of  the same be ration tenure e where it be say that a prescription can he that a  common person ought to repair a bridge unless it Godbolt he say to he by  reason of his tenure but it be otherwise in case of a corporation for these  error the indictment be quash by judgement of the court trin James in the king  bench to go into Trin rot
bridge contra mitchell where year acquiescence bar account between merchant a  bill be for a account by plaintiff a merchant against the defendant another  merchant who be his partner the defendant plead that the deal concern which  the plaintiff pray a account be transact above year before the bill bring and  plead such acquiescence without suit and also the statute of limitation James  c in bar of the account Gilbert per cur forbearance of suit for year will in  equity be a good bar though in a demand by one merchant upon another second it  be not necessary in the answer for the defendant to aver his have not promise  within six year to account c unless such promise be particular charge in the  bill as be resolve inter bodvil and the bishop of meath in this court and  further that though the statute have be always construe to except account open  between merchant and merchant yet that be to be understand with this  distinction that if open account be by subsequent act continue they be not bar  by the intervention of such length of time from the original transaction but  if such a account be by the complainant desert then in such case it be bar and  hold the defendant plea good
bridge one of the attorney versus Playdel for word you meaning the plaintiff  have cause this boy meaning a W then present to perjure himself judgement for  the plaintiff for call one witch a action will be stone versus Robert mich  James rotulo for these word thou art a witch and a enchanter for thou baste  bewitch strong be child no action lie but if thou say thou art a witch and  have bewitch child and that they be waste and destroy they be actionable if  felony be commit good cause to arrest one for it but not to speak word to  defame one
bridge v johnson Dec that a bill of review can be bring until the decree it  seek to impeach be sign and enrol but a party not bind to sign and enrol a  decree against himself for the purpose of bring a bill of review but he may  bring a bill in the nature of a supplemental bill and have the former cause  reheard at the same time so standish v Radley atk this bill be bring to be  relieve against a imposition in the sale of a real estate the defendant plead  the proceed and decree in a former suit in which the same transaction have be  in question but the decree have not be sign and enrol the present bill allege  some new circumstance which be not deny by the defendant answer west tempt  Hardwicke er p to the above statement of the case the Lord chancellor have  subjoin the follow memorandum in his notebook I think the plaintiff can not  bring a bill of review the former decree not be sign and enrol and that it be  hard to put he to sign and enrol a decree against himself that this bill be to  be consider as in the nature of a supplemental bill and the plaintiff may  apply to have the former cause reheard at the time of hear this new cause and  have complete direction in both west tempt Hardwicke therefore order that the  plea shall stand for a answer with liberty to except save the benefit to the  hear of the cause Reg lib a foe this case be take from Lord hardwicke notebook
bridge v mitchell June the statute of limitation plead by one partner to a  bill bring by another for the balance and a account and satisfaction the bill  set forth that the plaintiff and defendant many year ago be partner as  merchant and that upon settle account between they in there be due upon the  balance of that account from the defendant to the plaintiff one hundred and  ninety pound and pray a discovery a account and satisfaction the defendant  plead to so much of the bill as seek a account and satisfaction that it appeal  upon the plaintiff own show that the pretend balance be due above twentyfour  year before the fill of the bill and that in all that time he never commence  any suit for it and also plead the statute of limitation and per totan curian  the plea be allow on the long acquiescence of the party and after such a  length of time without suit it shall be presume Bunbury the balance be satisfy  and the court seem to think this be not a merchant account within the statute  of limitation these person not deal as merchant with one another but as one  merchant with other but give no positive opinion on this head but allow the  plea on the other Bunbury er p Bunbury de term S michaelis Friday October this  day sir Thomas Pengelly knight take his place of Lord chief baron of the court  of exchequer in the room of Lord chief baron Gilbert who die about the that of  this month
bridge vers Williamson see Preston v Dania lr ex bring money into court hill  Geo main v somner the court make the same rule to bring in only the arrear  burr the condition of a bind be to pay l by l per annum and the defendant have  leave to bring the arrear of the l per annum into court on the Act for  amendment of the law Bonafous v Rybot burr send for ante contra strange pro  def
bridge versus Horner in trespass with a continuando where this well lie ante p  comb S c Danv p trespass c upon not guilty plead there be a verdict for the  plaintiff and it be move in arrest of judgement that the declaration be ill  for it be for erect and continue perch of stone wall on the son of the  plaintiff April year W m transgression pillage quoad continuation muri pillage  a die of purifying year primo W m usq they exbibitionis billae continuando so  that the continuance Litt sect Inst b bro defence raze Ent b Carthew er p be  lie for one year before the commencement of the trespass and entire damage be  give all be void say non allocatur for this continuando be for a time before  the commencement of the trespass be senseless and void and it can be intend  that any damage be give for that matter which in it self be void therefore the  plaintiff have judgement
BRIDGELAND versus post dower counterplea to the view Bridgeland against post  and his wife in a writ of dower the tenant demand the view and the demandant  counterpleads the view quod Le tenant n ad entry nisi per Le baron and  thereupon the tenant demurrer and it be adjudge a good counterplea and the  tenant oust of his view accord e foe vide h pasc James
bridger against Coleby on a rescous return a attachment issue without motion  Vid the king v Philips ante p and case there cite cook upon a motion for a  attachment upon a rescous return a rule to show cause be grant but the court  afterward discharge the rule and say it be the stand practice that in all case  where a rescous be return by the sheriff a capias pro rescussu which be in the  nature of a attachment issue of course Vid highway v Derby vent
bridget Armsted plaintiff Samuel parker and mary his wife defendant bill to be  relieve against a verdict and judgement in trover the defendant plead the say  verdict and judgement the plea be not allow but the defendant order to answer  a action of trover be bring against Bridget Armsted the now plaintiff by the  defendant as executor to the say bridget son Thomas Armsted in which action  the say executor obtain a verdict for certain good to which the say Bridget  now claim a Title by her bill and to be relieve against the verdict and  suggest that it be obtain against her because she can not produce her witness  at the trial to report tempt finch make out her Title and that great part of  the good in the declaration mention and for which evidence be give to the jury  be secret take into the possession of the defendant Parker and his wife and by  they dispose the say defendant plead that all the matter pray in the bill be  examine at law report tempt finch er p and as to that part of the bill which  seek a relief for the defendant death and lodging at the plaintiff house the  say defendant demurrer for that the plaintiff have her remedy at law the court  disallow the plea and order the defendant to answer and that the plaintiff  shall be conclude by such answer and that if the defendant shall not in their  answer discover that some of the good for which they have obtain a verdict do  belong to the plaintiff then she shall pay they full cost of this suit but the  demurrer be allow
Bridgman and skinner when a defendant plead that the plaintiff strike he first  how far he shall not be allow to give in evidence a very violent battery by  way of justification under that plea at the sit at guildhall in a action of  assault and battery the defendant plead de son assault and now upon evidence  the fact appear to be that upon some few word arise between the plaintiff and  defendant about a fork which the plaintiff have in his hand the defendant  endeavour to take it from he upon which the plaintiff give he a slight blow or  two and upon that the defendant strike the plaintiff so violent a blow over  the eye that the cure of it cost the plaintiff two guinea upon this evidence  the chief justice declare to the jury that the defendant endeavour to take the  fork from the plaintiff be a assault and therefore for that reason they ought  to find a verdict for the plaintiff but even suppose this circumstance have be  out of the case yet still he say the plaintiff give the defendant a slight  blow can not justify the defendant return Barnardiston king b it in so violent  a manner thereupon on both account he think the jury ought to find a verdict  for the plaintiff which they accord do however they give he but d damage  because they think he to blame as well as the defendant
brier v Lansdown Nov process of venire facias leave at the defendant house  good though he be beyond sea it be move by sir Constantine Phipps to set aside  a venire facias which be the old process of this court on the plea side a  distringa thereupon upon a affidavit that the defendant be in France when the  venire facias be leave at his house but upon hear sergeant Chesshyre and Mr  Bootle on the other side the process be adjudge to be good by three baron  against price baron at guildhall sit
brigg case action for the case for word you have buy a roan steal horse know  he to he steal it be adjudge that the word be actionable Godbolt er p
briggs v clerk lds Jo Briggs v clarke error in parliament from judgement in  exchequerchamber Writ of error on a judgement in b r affirm in the  exchequerchamber upon a verdict in debt for the escape of one cook and none  appear for the plaintiff in the Writ of error the judgement be affirm with the  increase of forty pound in cost vide the case of ellison and Warner mich car b  r Keble whether a Writ of error lie in parliament after judgement affirm in  the exchequerchamber or if that proceed in the exchequerchamber do not come in  lieu of error in parliament accord to the statute of Elizabeth
briggs vers GREINFEILD and benger one defendant overthrow the action after  judgement per default against the other it shall be stay as to both SC l raym  Mod SC more full trespass against two defendant one suffer judgement to go by  default and the other plead a distress for rend and a licence from the  plaintiff to sell the good upon which issue be join and a verdict for the  defendant sergeant Eyre move to stay the judgement against the other defendant  since upon the whole record it appear the plaintiff have no cause of action  Inst b salk cro James lev et per curian judgement be arrest as to both if  assumpsit be bring against two and one let we judgement go by default and the  other plead to issue and have a verdict upon the merit the plaintiff shall be  bar as to the other but it be otherwise in tort per buller I anon sit at g  hall Trin Geo ms but anon salk cite above seem contra
Brigham against Robson ante Thursday Jan tithe in Dism Br   Coleman pray a  consult in default of proof of suggestion of a modus to vicar endow in  discharge of tithe sue for by the parson of Walterbeach because only payment  be prove time out of c not any ancient endowment of the vicarage in Ely  diocese as Yelvert green and Austen send non allocatur for per curian payment  be evidence of the endowment and this be the modus suggest principal and no  man can prove other endowment and a consultation be deny
Brigham and Brocas indictment in action upon the case for false and malicious  indict the plaintiff for deceitful sale of hair Jeoffryes on roll style pl  matthews hoppings case car move to stay judgement be but a mere trespass or  trover and no matter indictable send non allocatur for this be a matter  criminal and slanderous and fraudulent and worse than action upon the case for  sue action without cause to hold the plaintiff to bail and on Verdon and  Balthamore and Kirk and Levial judgement for the plaintiff
Brigham versus Godwin the formedon do abate by the death of one of the  defendant and upon a new writ bring by Journes account the tenant essoined  Brownlow goldsborough er p a dit be move by the demandant that the essoin  shall be quash because tbb tenant be essoined upon the first writ but the  essoin be allow by the court but it be hold by the court that if the tenant  have the view upon the first writ he shall never have the view again at the  commonlaw we may have have a due essoin upon view as often as he bring a new  writ and Hobart hold that if by the commonlaw it be to be grant the statute do  not abridge it two view do not lie upon one writ at the commonlaw and if this  shall be account but one writ the view lie not but in this case the tenant do  relinquish the view because he have day to plead discuss do d Cligt v Birkhead  ex
bright against Jackson and other in replevin trin geo plaintiff have plead by  leave of the court two several matter in bar to the avowry by way of  prescription for right of common c and on one of the plead the fact be find  for he but there be no certificate from the judge who try the cause that  plaintiff have probable cause to plead the other plea defendant move for cost  occasion thereby pursuant to stat queen whether the question be whether these  proceed be within that statute or not the avowant in replevin be omit in the  word of the statute rule to show cause why plaintiff shall not pay cost  enlarge prime for defendant pool for plaintiff barn er p
bright against Jackson in replevin hill geo the avowant apply under the stat Q  whether for the amendment of the law for cost some of the issue join on  several plead in bar to the avowry plead by leave of the court be find for he  and no certificate by the judge that such plead be material the word avowant  happen to be omit in the stat though the word defendant tenant and plaintiff  be insert a avowant be in the nature of a defendant and plain within the  meaning and intent of the statute rule absolute that prothonotary shall tax  avowants barn cost on the plea find for he and that the same be deduct out of  cost allow plaintiff prime for avowant will and pool for plaintiff