case Harcourt against fox SC show p c by Henry c the custos rotulorum have the  appoint of the clerk of the peace and by will mary c S he be authorize when  ever the office shall be void to appoint one able and sufficient person reside  in the county or place to execute the same by himself or his sufficient deputy  and to take and receive the fee thereof for so long time only as such clerk of  the peace shall well demean himself in his say office and give the session  authority to discharge he for miss shower KB er p behaviour and appoint  another a appointment make by a custos rotulorum pursuant to these statute be  as to he a appointment for life and therefore the office do not become void on  the custos be remove nor can the succeed custos remove a clerk of the peace so  appoint and appoint another SC post SC Mod SC comb SC show p c SC Mod SC holt  SC ld ray sir Thomas powis my Lord I be of counsel in that case for the  plaintiff dolben justice then go on sir Thomas powis may it please your  lordship Simon Harcourt Esq be plaintiff and John fox Esq be defendant this be  a action upon the case bring by way of indebitatus assumpsit by the plaintiff  against the defendant for forty shilling by the defendant have and receive for  the plaintiff use there be non assumpsit plead and upon the trial of that  issue there be a special verdict find at the nisi prius before your lordship  and in that special verdict the jury find first the statute of Henry c entitle  a bill for custos rotulorum and clerkship of the peace and then the verdict go  on and find the Act of parliament make in the first year of king William and  queen mary entitle a Act for enable lord commissioner for the great seal to  execute the office of Lord chancellor or Lord keeper and the verdict do  likewise find several clause in this last Act that particular relate to the  office of custos rotulorum and clerk of the peace then shower KB they find  that the right honourable John earl of Clare be by letter patent from this  king and queen date the that day of July in the first year of their reign  accord to the statute of Henry c make custos rotulorum for the county of  Middlesex and they set forth the letter patent in haec word they next find  that the office of clerk of the peace for this county be then void the earl of  Clare by write under his band and seal the that of July I will mary do  nominate appoint and constitute the plaintiff Mr Harcourt to be clerk of the  peace for Middlesex for so long time only as he shall well demean himself  therein and the instrument be likewise find in haec word they also find the  plaintiff to be a person capable and sufficient to have and execute this  office and that he do take upon he the execution thereof and that before he do  so at the quarter session for the county in open session he take the oath  require by the last mention Act of this king and queen and the oath of clerk  of the peace and do do and perform all other thing necessary to make he a  complete clerk of the peace and that during all the time that he do exercise  and execute that office he do well behave himself therein then they find that  on the five of February in the three year of the king and queen the earl of  Clare be in due manner remove from the office of custos rotulorum and the  right honourable William earl of Bedford be by letter patent of the king and  queen date the that of February in the three year of their reign make custos  rotulorum for this county accord to the statute of Henry c and those letter  patent be also find in haec word they find that the earl of Bedford by a write  under his hand and seal date the that of February in the four year of the king  and queen constitute and appoint the defendant Mr fox to be clerk of the peace  for this county to bold the office for and during the time that the earl shall  occupy and exercise the office of custos rotulorum so as he well demean  himself therein they find likewise that Mr fox the defendant be a person  capable and sufficient to have and exercise the place and in open session do  take the oath require in the late Act and do all other thing requisite to  qualify he for the office and do thereupon enter upon the execution of it and  during that time execute it do well demean himself therein and do take the fee  belong to the office which they find to be to the value of five shilling but  shower KB whether or no the plaintiff ought to receive this five shilling  against the defendant they can tell but submit that upon this whole matter  thus find to the court my lord I take it the single question in this case upon  special verdict will be whether or no Mr Harcourt who be duly constitute clerk  of the peace for the county of Middlesex by the earl of Clare while he be  custos rotulorum do thereby become clerk of the peace for life only removable  for misbehaviour or whether his continuance in that office depend upon the  continuance of the custos in his office so as upon his death or removal the  clerkship of the peace be to cease and shower KB er p be determine and I do  take it with submission that he be and still be clerk of the peace for his  life only removable for misdemeanour in his office and not dependent upon the  death or removal of the custos rotulorum to make out this I shall consider  three thing first how this matter stand at commonlaw I mean before that  statute of Henry c for strict speak at commonlaw there be neither custos  rotulorum nor justice of the peace nor clerk of the peace second how it stand  upon that statute and another which I shall have occasion to take notice of  though not find in the verdict and that be Edward c and three how it now stand  at present upon this late Act in the first year of this king and queen about  the lord commissioner for the great seal now as to the first I take it by the  commonlaw and the ancient constitution of the kingdom all officer of court of  justice and immediate relate to the execution of justice be in for their life  only removable for misbehaviour in their office not only my lord the judge of  the court in Westminster hall be ancient as they now be since the revolution  how day see bene to bear about but all the officer of note in the several  court under they be so and most of they continue so to this day as the clerk  of the crown in this court and in the chancery the chief clerk on the civil  side in this court the prothonotories in the common plea the master of the  office of plea in the exchequer and many other I think speak general they be  all in for their life by the commonlaw and be so still to this day so shower  KB it be and be with the clerk of assize and so I take it before this statute  of Henry c it be with the clerk of the peace and in this particular the wisdom  of the law be very great for it be a encouragement to man to fit and prepare  themselves for the execution and performance of those office that when by such  a capacity they have obtain they they may act in they safe without fear or  dependence upon favour and when they have serve in they faithful and honest  and do their duty they shall not be removable at pleasure and on the other  side the people be safe for injustice corruption or other misdemeanour in a  office be sufficient cause for removal and displace the offender my Lord I  shall not enlarge upon this matter I need not it be so well know I do rather  but touch upon it to introduce what I be consider upon this first head how it  stand before this statute which seem calculate to reduce it to the ancient  course for perhaps affectation of power and unlawful gain be the mischief that  occasion both the act find in this verdict but to come to the matter more  close I take it that ancient the custos rotulorum be in the nomination of the  Lord chancellor or keeper and I think as ancient the nomination of the clerk  of the peace be in the custos rotulorum but my Lord though he be nominate by  the custos rotulorum yet he be not dependent on he nor removable upon his  death or removal from the office of custos rotulorum and that I conceive upon  these ground first from a uniformity which the law love and use between this  officer and all other officer of this nature as those I mention in this court  and the common plea in the nomination of the chief justice and more particular  the clerk of assize who upon any vacancy be put in by the senior judge of  assize at that time for that circuit but yet he be not dependent upon that  judge continuance in his place for all these though they be nominate by a  particular person yet when they be in they be officer of the public and not of  those person that place they first in their office second the next thing I can  offer be this that the clerk of the peace be not the clerk of the custos but  of all the justice of the peace in general and proper clerk of the session of  the peace and so express the statute of Richard c where the law appoint the  wage of the justice of the peace at the session it say that every justice of  the peace shower KB shall take for his wage for every day of the session four  shilling and their clerk two shilling so that this statute do express call the  clerk of the peace their clerk it be true the custos rotulorum be usual a  person of great quality and first and most eminent among the justice as  Lambert in his eirenarcha u foe say and he have the nomination of the clerk of  the peace but as he afterward say folio when he be so nominate he be not the  clerk of the custos rotulorum but the clerk of the justice so as the clerk of  assize who in shower KB er p the execution of his office be near of kin to the  clerk of the peace though he be nominate by the senior judge at the time of  the vacancy yet he be not the clerk of the judge but of the assize so be the  clerk of the peace nominate by the custos but be not the clerk of the custos  but of the justice in their session and as the clerk of the assize be not  dependent upon the death or removal of he who put he in so the clerk of the  peace be not dependent upon the death or removal of he who put he in I speak  now of what be ancient nay three the clerk of the peace be so far from be the  clerk of the custos that in the yearbook of Henry folio he be call the clerk  and attorney of the king as the clerk of the crown be here clergyman et  attornatus domini king and say that book by the duty of his office he be to  prosecute for the king as his attorney nay he be so far a servant of the crown  that by the statute of Elizabeth c if a robbery be commit and hueandcry raise  and the inhabitant of the hundred do not make fresh pursuit and so the hundred  incur the penalty of former law there it be provide that such inhabitant shall  forfeit and lose one moiety of such penalty as shall be recover against the  hundred to be sue for by and in the name of the clerk of the peace for the  time be without name his Christian or surname and such action not to abate for  his death or removal so that it seem to make something like a corporation in  that office and therefore by the ancient constitution I take it that it be  pretty clear the clerk of the peace have his office for life that he be not  the clerk of the custos rotulorum but the clerk of the justice or of the king  and a servant of the crown and not dependent upon the death or removal of the  custos and now my Lord I come to the second thing and that be the statute of  Henry c to consider how it stand there upon that statute and the other I  mention before that be and of Edward c the shower KB statute of Henry c recite  that whereas heretofore the Lord chancellor for the time be by virtue of his  office have the nomination and appointment of the custos rotulorum and the  custos rotulorum by his office have the nomination of the clerk of the peace  but say that Act of late person unlearned and unfit for those office have by  labour friendship and mean get they for term of their life by patent from the  crown therefore it be enact that none shall be appoint custos rotulorum for  the future without a bill sign by the king own hand which shall be a warrant  to the chancellor or keeper to make he out a commission for that office to  continue only till the king by another bill so sign do appoint another person  to be custos thus it be as to the custos then as to the clerk of the peace it  say that the custos rotulorum shall appoint the clerk of the peace and grant  that office to a able person to hold during the time that the custos shall  enjoy his office so as the clerk demean himself well in the office thus say  the statute of Henry c and now it have make a alteration in this matter from  what it ancient be in these particular first that whereas the chancellor alone  do by virtue of his office absolute appoint the custos rotulorum now he be to  give out the commission but sub modus by a warrant by a bill sign by the king  own hand and then he be to continue in the office till another be appoint by  another bill sign with the king own hand so that he be removable at the king  pleasure and then second as to the clerk of the peace there be likewise make a  very considerable alteration for whereas before as I have offer his office  must be for life he be now make dependent upon the continuance of the custos  rotulorum and removable upon his death or removal for he be to hold during the  time the custos shall enjoy his office which word do seem to make it clear  that he do depend upon he so long as the one be custos rotulorum so long and  no long the other be clerk of the peace but not long after this about three or  four year after come the statute that I mention of Edward c and that statute  take notice that by the statute of Henry the Lord chancellor or keeper can not  commissionate a custos but by bill sign by the king own band and there be  vacancy for some long time for want of such a bill whereby justice be hinder  and it be troublesome to the king shower KB to be move for bill upon such  vacancy and it be ancient accustom to be do by the chancellor or keeper  therefore that Act do enact that the chancellor or keeper shall again nominate  the custos rotulorum and thereby do shower KB er p restore the chancellor or  keeper as to a former right take away by the statute Henry c but that statute  say nothing at all as to the clerk of the peace he seem still to be remain  under the statute of Henry c and therefore my Lord I think it be take till of  late that be till the Act of this king and queen that the clerk of the peace  do still depend upon the possession of the custos rotulorum of his office and  be to continue no long than the custos continue to be custos therefore I now  come to the three and last thing which I propose to insist upon in this case  and that be the statute I will and mary c and I take it my Lord that this  statute have clear restore the clerk of the peace to big ancient interest in  his office to hold it for term of big life determinable only upon big  misbehaviour in his office here I shall first consider the clause of this Act  that relate to the custos rotulorum and then what relate to the clerk of the  peace now as to the custos rotulorum this statute have place it again as it be  by the statute of Henry c and consequent have repeal the statute of and Edward  c for it have enact that the nominate and appoint of the custos rotulorum  shall be as be direct by Henry c any law usage or statute to the contrary in  any wise notwithstanding but my Lord as to the clerk of the peace it will be  observable how this statute provide for that it say that the custos rotulorum  or other person to who it do of right belong to nominate or appoint the clerk  of the peace shall from time to time where the office be void nominate and  appoint one able and sufficient person reside in the country or place for  which he be clerk to execute the same by himself or sufficient deputy and to  take the fee and perquisite of the office for so long time only as such clerk  of the peace shall well demean himself in his say office by virtue of this  clause I take it that the clerk of the peace have a estate for big life in the  office first from the plain and positive word and second from the intention of  this Act of parliament my Lord the word seem as plain to I to signify so much  as any word can do for if any Act of parliament be make at this day that do  erect a new court and do likewise appoint that court shower KB to make officer  who shall execute their office so long time only as they shall well behave  themselves in their office those word will give they a estate for life in  their office if the king or any subject who have the disposal or grant of any  office shall grant this office to I S to execute it so long as he shall demean  himself well in the office only no question but that if the party grant have a  power to grant it for life the grantee will have a estate for life in the  office so that I take it the word here in this Act be as full and plain as can  be and I need not repeat they again but my Lord beside these express word  which seem to I to be so very plain and clear there be many thing in this Act  that will be find upon consideration to enforce this to be the meaning first  the clause relate to the clerk of the peace have industrious and careful as on  set purpose omit that clause in the statute of Henry c which make the clerk of  the peace dependent upon the custos rotulorum and removable upon big death and  removal but have as careful use the other word in this statute about his  removal for misdemeanour for whereas the statute of Henry c say that the clerk  of the peace shall hold and enjoy the office during the time that the custos  rotulorum shall occupy and exercise big office so as the clerk demean himself  well in the office this Act say the custos rotulorum shall appoint and  nominate one able and sufficient person to execute the office of clerk of the  peace and take the fee for so long time only as such clerk of the peace shall  well demean himself in the office and omit total those other word during the  time that the custos shall continue custos and that omission be not by  oversight and through inadvertency but be industrious do because this Act  express take notice of the statute of Henry c and appoint the nomination of  the custos to be accord to that statute and therefore the omission can be by  chance a second thing that I will offer to your lordship to prove this to be  the meaning of this Act be this the statute have empower he who have the right  to nominate one to hold it for so long time only as he shall well demean  himself in the office go on and make provision how he may be remove for a  misbehaviour for have make he removable only for misdemeanour it be proper  shower KB er p next to consider where and how and by who this removal shall be  make therefore shower KB the next clause do direct that a accusation shall be  put in against he in write and this to be do in open session before the  justice where it shall be examine into and prove and be adjudge to be a  misbehaviour by the major part of the justice present they may then suspend or  discharge he from the office they may remove he in such a case but it be not  say that the custos rotulorum shall remove he or suspend he and this prove  first that he be a officer of the justice of the peace and under the control  of that court and not of the custos and second that by reason of the great  formality and ceremony that the Act require to be use in his suspension or  removal they do look upon he as so fix in his office as that he be not  removable except only for misbehaviour in his office but there be further a  three thing that be to be consider in this Act and that be this suppose the  clerk of the peace shall be remove by the justice for misbehaviour in case the  custos do not nominate or appoint another before the next general quarter  session then the justice shall nominate and appoint one now I will fain ask  this question whether if one be remove by the justice and the custos neglect  or refuse to nominate another before the next quarter session and the justice  do appoint one whether or no he who be so put in by the justice shall be so  dependent upon the custos as to be remove upon his death or removal and I take  it he shall not and sure it never be the meaning of the Act that he who come  in by the appointment of the justice in the session upon the default and  omission of the custos to nominate one shall have a great estate in the office  than he who have the primary title by the nomination of the custos rotulorum  the last thing that I will offer and which seem to I with submission to be a  strong argument that the parliament do intend the clerk of the peace shall  have a more durable estate in his office than to depend upon the continuance  of the custos in his office be the great and strict provision that be make in  this Act that a clerk of the peace shall not buy his office my Lord it be  consider and that very right that if he be now establish for his life and  subject as to his office to no accident but misbehaviour or death it may be  very well worth his while to bid money for it and people will be eager to  shower KB chaffer for it whereas before the uncertainty of the estate depend  not only upon his own life but the life surrender or removal of the custos it  will be very hazardous to give money for such a uncertain interest but now if  he be in certain for life upon his good behaviour in the office it may prove a  good bargain and upon this account do the Act strict provide against any thing  of that nature it first make it illegal to buy or sell under the penalty of  forfeit on both side the double of what be give or take and of disability to  hold their place nay not only so but it order that the clerk of the peace  before he enter upon his office shall in open session take a oath that he have  not nor will pay any money or reward nor give any bind or assurance to pay  money fee or profit direct or indirect to any person or person whatsoever for  such nomination or appointment now my Lord what be the meaning of all this  caution and care first about the remove the person but that he be in for life  and therefore more heed be to be take that such a interest shall not light be  divest and second what mean the great care that he shall be let in by clean  hand but that now the estate for life be a valuable interest to purchase and  give money for my Lord these be the thing that I do humble offer to your  lordship consideration first that by the ancient constitution he be a officer  for life second that by the statute of Henry he be make dependent upon the  continuance of the custos in his office but three upon the last Act he be  restore to his ancient estate for life both by the plain word and also by the  meaning of the Act to be collect from the several part of it that have be  mention so that I take it he be now in for life and the consequence of that  will be that the fee receive by the defendant belong to the office and be  receive to his use who have right to the office and so the plaintiff ought to  recover and therefore I humble pray your lordship judgement for he Mr hawles  may it please your lordship to favour I with a word for the defendant Mr fox  the special verdict have be already true open by sir shower KB er p Thomas  powis and therefore I shall not go about to repeat it but I will follow the  method in consider this case which he have do before I and shower KB first  with submission whatsoever the commonlaw be as to office that be so ancient be  no rule in this matter though it be we know that as our book tell we some  office be for life and the office of chancellor of England my Lord coke say  can not be grant to any one for life and why because it never be so grant  custom and nothing else prevail and govern in all those case of those office  that be usual grant for life a grant of such a office for life be good and of  those that be not usual grant for life a grant of such a office for life be  void but as to this office now in dispute there can be no pretence of its be a  commonlaw office for the commonlaw know no such thing as a clerk of the peace  nor justice of the peace to who they say he be a clerk we know that the  statute of Edward c that make justice of the peace make no mention of any such  clerk or officer as clerk of the peace but it be a incident perhaps some body  be necessary to officiate in that kind for the justice will not make and write  their own record themselves and therefore must have some officer to do it for  they and that statute that be mention on the other side of Richard c show  plain that there be no such officer then know by that name as clerk of the  peace for he be call there the justice clerk so that in all probability he be  one that be appoint by they to do that work for they nay my Lord as to any  thing that we know it be very probable and I believe it be so at that time he  that be their clerk be custos rotulorum and entrust with the keep of the  record and afterward it come to be a honorary thing to be the custos rotulorum  he that be the most eminent for quality among they be appoint to that trust  and then he appoint the clerk as his deputy or servant under he my Lord there  be no statute or law that I can find that ever give any power to the  chancellor to make a custos rotulorum but the chancellor make out the  commission for constitute the justice of the peace may very well put upon they  one to be the keeper of the record and to have the first place or degree among  they and then that custos may very well put one upon the session as his  servant or deputy for the management and custody of the record who be clerk at  the session come in time to be clerk of the peace this look to be the most  probable account that can be give of this matter for a certain one can be give  we have no history of it in our lawbook or elsewhere but shower KB the statute  of Henry c recite that the chancellor have very much pervert the institution  and alter the intend course by take upon he to make grant of the office of  custos rotulorum for life and so likewise the clerk of the peace be for life  too it be not only that ignorant and insufficient person be put into the  office for then the commonlaw itself will turn out of any office if they be  not able to perform it that be not the main reason of make the Act but the  grant for life be the great grievance and therefore it do enact for a remedy  of that mischief that the custos rotulorum shall be appoint by bill sign with  the king own hand and at his pleasure removable and alterable and the clerk of  the peace be to be appoint by the custos and to continue only during the time  of the other continue to be custos by this Act the custos by way of remedy to  the former inconvenience have a power to grant the clerkship of the peace for  so long as be be custos and he be to receive the fee so as he behave himself  well in the office and though there be no negative word that he shall continue  clerk of the peace no long yet with submission these affirmative word amount  to a negative for when the Act recite that the grant that be make for life be  mischievous and the law be to make provision of a remedy to that grievance and  in order so it say the custos shall be removable at the king pleasure and the  clerk of the peace shall be appoint by the custos to continue during his time  of be custos so as he behave himself well in the office that with submission  import that the clerkship of the peace shall never be grant for a long  interest than the custos have in his office the statute of Edward c do indeed  repeal part of this statute of Henry c not by express word of repeal but by a  very strong implication by give the chancellor or keeper the power of nominate  and appoint the custos rotulorum but the office of the clerk of the peace be  not touch in this statute of Edward c but continue as it be settle before by  Henry shower KB er p c which be only during the time of such custos continue  in his office it be then my Lord this new statute of the first of this king  and queen that if any be come and make the variation as to this matter at  least that minister the occasion of dispute and true with submission if the  case stand bare upon that point as it shall seem it do I think that there be  nothing in this Act that make any such alteration of the law as they now  contend for it shower KB be true the word seem to have something of a change  in they at the first read but if your lordship please to look a little near  and more narrow into they there be no change at all the word so long only as  he shall well demean himself in the office be not enlarge of his estate but  restrictive only and with submission when ever you will make a grant for life  to be good you must consider the power and capacity of the grantor and how the  thing grant be capable of have a grant make of it if tenant in tail make a  lease for life of his entail land that be only a lease for the life of tenant  in tail and not for the life of the lessee because he can not grant any  further interest but if tenant in fee grant a estate for life that will be a  good lease for the life of the lessee because he be capable of make such a  grant which the other be not and as I say it must be consider further whether  the office or thing grant be capable of have a grant make of it for life and  with submission when there be a express statute before that say it shall be  but during the continuance of the grantor in his office of custos then every  grant be to be construe accord to that provision and be good if it pursue that  provision but otherwise it be not good I know very well that it be say a grant  how day see bene to bear about be a grant for the life of the grantee but my  Lord if you look into those word more narrow they do not import any such thing  at all it be indeed a restrictive condition that the law put upon all officer  for misdemeanour in any office though grant in fee be a forfeiture of the  office but all that be to be consider be of it be a office that be capable of  be grant for life those word may amount to a grant for life as expound by the  usage and capacity of the office itself otherwise it will not for those word  seem only to be a expression of what the law always imply though not  particular express if it operate any thing it seem only to have reference to  the power of the grantor as a restriction not a enlargement of the estate of  the grantee especial where there be by law a incapacity upon the very office  of be grant for life therefore that which I most principal rely and must  insist upon be the statute of Henry c which be not repeal as to this matter by  Edward c nor by will mary c and this statute express say that the clerk of the  peace be to continue in his office only during the time that the custos who  put he in continue to be custos the statute of Edward do shower KB not alter  this matter and where it do make any alteration itself be express repeal by  this last Act of this king and queen which revive Henry c as to what  alteration be make by Edward c about the nomination of custos and appoint that  the order appoint by Henry c be constant observe and as to the clerk of the  peace I take it this last Act be no way a repeal of Henry c my Lord I hold it  as a settle rule that if there be two statute that be consistent with one  another and not repugnant and contradictory the latter statute shall not be  expound to be a repeal of the former I do indeed clear conceive that the Act  of the first of this king and queen do repeal that of Edward c but be  consistent with and consequent do not repeal the statute of Henry c when the  matter of two statute be direct contradictory the one to the other I do agree  this last must be observe and do repeal the first but where they do not  contradict one another but may consist and stand together the latter be no  repeal of the former as the rule be give in dr foster case in   the statute of  Elizabeth c that give the twenty pound a month for recusancy it be resolve do  not repeal the statute of Elizabeth c for the twelve penny a Sunday because  they be both consistent and stand together and do not direct contradict one  another it be to no purpose to cite any more case to this point or to multiply  authority it be a agree settle point that where act of parliament be  consistent the latter do not repeal the prior they be to be take as will be if  there be two will that be inconsistent with each other the latter will shall  be a revocation of the former but if they can stand together it shall be no  shower KB er p revocation as be the case of Hodgkinson v wood cro car my Lord  it will be same thing as to act of parliament law m earlier times opposite  direction abrogate but if they be not contrary but consistent then they do not  abrogate the former let we then look upon these statute and see whether they  be not consistent the one say the clerk shall continue in his office during  the time that the custos continue in his office so as he demean himself well  the other say he shall enjoy the office so long only as he demean himself well  in it now if you take the office to be grantable but only during the time that  the custos continue to be custos as the statute of Henry c say and after there  shall come these word that be in this latter statute they be plain consistent  together and not contradictory at all nay shower KB the express grant to Mr  fox from the earl of Bedford be pursuant to the word of the statute of Henry c  which restrain it as well as the last statute to well demean himself in the  office his grant be to hold the office during such time as the earl continue  to be custos so as he demean himself well in the office but Mr harcourt grant  be without any relation to the provision of the statute of Henry c which be  intend by this last Act to be revive and all the meaning of it as to the clerk  of the peace be to give the justice a rule and method how to displace he for  misdemeanour all which thing be consistent with the order appoint for this  office by the statute of Henry c and not contradictory to it and be so they  can be expound to be a repeal of that statute and therefore the office become  void upon the removal of my Lord of Clare and the present custos be entitle to  make a new grant of it for his time which he have do accord to the defendant  and I hope your lordship will please to give your judgement for he shower KB  michaelmas term the five of William and mary in the king bench Saturday the  that November