case barbara wood against sir John Shurley and his wife late wife to sir Henry  bowyer a husband covenant to stand seize to the use of himself in tail  remainder to his wife for life remainder to a stranger in tail reversion to  his right heir and afterward make a feoff to trustee to the use of himself and  his wife for their life without impeachment of waste by way of jointure the  wife shall not elect to take the last settlement but by her entry after the  death of her husband without issue shall be remit for the benefit of he in  remainder to her first estate for life the entail claim in the first estate be  allege in the replication must be traverse in the rejoinder more hob roll ab    light   Leon Hutton and winch dyer roll Rep Com dig Bl Com error of a  judgement in the common plea in dower of the dower of sir Henry bowyer where  the tenant plead that sir Henry bowyer be seize in fee of the manor of W and  feoff I S and I d to the use of himself and his wife for their life without  impeachment of waste the remainder over which be for jointure to his wife and  that afterward he die and the wife enter claim it for her jointure et hoc c  croak throw the plaintiff reply that the say sir Henry bowyer before this  feoff by indenture the may James covenant to stand seize of that manor to the  use of himself in tail and for default of such issue to the use of the say  wife for her life and after to the use of sir Thomas Henley in tail and after  to his right heir and that he afterward upon the may James make the feoff  mention in the bar and die without issue and afterward she enter claim that  estate by the indenture and be remit c the tenant rejoin that the say feme  after the death of her husband enter claimino her estate for life without  impeachment of waste by the say feoff and demand judgement if against her  claim she may be remit et hoc c whereupon it be demurrer and adjudge for the  demandant and error be bring and the error assign in point of law wherein two  question be move croak James er p first if a feme covert have a estate limit  to her by her husband for life remainder to a stranger in tail and afterward  the husband alter this estate and limit to the wife another estate whether the  wife have election of which estate she will have and waive the remitter and  prejudice he in remainder or if for the benefit of he in remainder she shall  be remit volens not notwithstanding her claim to take by the second estate  limit c second whether the rejoinder be good without traverse the entail claim  in the first estate allege in the replication or if the demandant ought to  have take traverse because that the tenant in the bar plead a entry claim that  estate by the feoff and for both point it be adjudge for the demandant in the  common plea that she be remit for the benefit of he in remainder and that the  tenant ought to have take a traverse to the matter allege in the replication  and that for want thereof the rejoinder be ill in substance and not in form  only and that advantage ought to be take thereof although it be not show for  cause this case be oftentimes argue at the bar be now this term argue at the  bench and croak Doderidge and Houghton hold that she be remit instant by her  entry and the remainder vest in he in the remainder and the claim can alter it  and that volens not she be in of her first estate and that it be not any  jointure because it be a estate for life limit to begin after a estate tail  and although the estate tail be spend by her husband death without issue so  that her estate begin present by the death of her husband yet forasmuch as it  can not be say to be a jointure at the beginning whatsoever happen afterward  shall not make it to be a jointure but Montague chief justice argue strong  against it that both estate be limit to her during the coverture and of that  estate she shall be in and therefore there be a difference when croak throw  she have a ancient right before the coverture there if she take a new estate  during the coverture the law peradventure will judge her in by remitter  especial it be for the benefit of he in the remainder but when she take two  several estate during the coverture she be now to have her election which of  they she will have and her claim shall determine her election vide Edward pl  dyer Henry pl Henry pl but for the last point they all agree that the tenant  ought to have take traverse to the claim allege and the not take traverse make  the plea vicious in substance wherefore the judgement be affirm