BRICKNOLD against Owen after judgement the defendant die the plaintiff may sue  out a to know fascias against the heir and tenant of the land which be the  defendant at the time of the judgement and elegits against they without  previous process against the executor debt and damage be recover against one  in London and before execution defendant die plaintiff sue out a to know  facias into London against the heir by his name and as tenant of the land and  tenement which be defendant on the day of render the judgement dyer aforesaid  and it be return nothing to have nec be invention and upon a testatum that  diverse land and tenement which be of the aforesaid defendant at the time of  the judgement c be in four county the plaintiff have four several writ of to  know facias against the tenant general without name any one and two of those  writ be return serve S that h Owen be tenant of two several rentcharge c and  that he be warn c and make default and the other two be return quod no one are  the earth to hold c and plaintiff have against he two special writ of elegit  contain the whole matter quaere if there ought not to issue first a to know  facias against the executor of the debtor and if nothing c then afterward  against the terratenants as in m h a pl but in the Judicial register foe a  such a to know facias as above be express upon a recognizance and it be all  one law as it seem and note that the statute of west cap which give the elegit  be that the sheriff shall deliver all the chattel of the debtor save only his  oven and beast of his plough anal the one half of his land until the debt be  levy by a reasonable price or extent so that the executor for the good if any  there be be Chargeable as well as the heir for the land as it seem therefore  encore ind if this be at the election and liberty of the plaintiff cc hill  Elizabeth note per manwood chief baron that the course of the exchequer be  that if a man be in debt to the king by record or otherwise and die the heir  shall not be charge if the executor have asset nor the feoff if either of they  have for he say that the executor and heir come to the land and good gratis  and therefore in reason ought to be charge ante b in margin issue that  executor have asset on the day of the writ be well support by evidence of  asset pay into their hand in the prerogative court on that morning though they  prove immediate payment of it over to another creditor by order of the court  previous to the actual issue of the writ in debt against executor the  plaintiff et nisi prius in London this term give in evidence to prove asset in  their hand on the day dyer b er p of the writ purchase which be that June year  c that on the same day a sum of money to the value of the debt and more be  bring into the prerogative court of Canterbury and there deliver to the  executor as a debt due to the testator and this can not be deny by the  executor but they show to the Jerry that immediate in the say court they  deliver and pay the say sum to another creditor of their testator by the order  of the say court and yet this be not allow for administration but that this  shall be hold asset for the plaintiff although the writ be purchase on the  same day after the payment of the money and so these asset be prove by a  narrow pinch but by special plead defendant may perhaps have help himself  wherefore the jury find asset general on the day of sue out the writ without  give any special verdict it seem that the asset shall be special find upon  riens per dissent this point be hill James b r error by spurling v Gawsel