case Cromwell against GRUNSDALE a declaration in debt on a bind for forty  pound be support by evidence of a bind de twenty in quadrant scales S c salk S  c ld ray S c comb S c salk S c holt S c Mod debt upon a bind for forty pound  bring against the defendant as executor of Roger Urlwyn the plaintiff declare  that Roger Urlwyn otherwise urlin in the year do by a certain write Obligatory  seal by he c become bind to the plaintiff in forty pound by these word in  quadrant scales upon non be factum plead the jury find a special verdict that  Roger urlin do sign seal and deliver to the plaintiff a certain write follow  noverint c our Rogerum urlin c tender et really to bind up Georgio Cromwell in  Com predict Mid de twenty in quadrant scales c that primo die Julii year royal  power king caroli favorable they find the condition of the obligation be for  payment of twenty pound twelve shilling and that it be sign with the mark of  Roger Urlwyn the question be whether the bind find by the jury will warrant  that set forth in this declaration those who argue for it insist that this be  a good declaration and a good verdict they agree that if the condition have be  collateral there may have be some difficulty to find out the meaning of these  word in the bind but here the bind and condition make one entire obligation  and the twenty shall be reject as surplusage for it can have no signification  here because it be not accord to the condition if so then quadrant must be  take to be the word to signify the sum in which the obligor intend to be bind  and then no rule in law will be break for though it be a insensible word yet  the bind be good as for instance a man be bind in sessanta for sixty scales  and the bind be hold good roll Abr cro James hob a so if a man be bind in  seventy et fifty scales this be good for seven hundred and fifty pound hob  roll Abr b though the jury do not find that the obligor intend to be bind in  such a sum it be argue on the other side that quadrant will not answer the  word forty and that in all the case where bind of this nature have be adjudge  good the word which denote either ten or hundred be plain and clear as to the  case of Parry v dale hob c in my Lord Hobart who have report it different from  all the reporter of that time for it be noverint whole world per present  circumstance our c tender c in quinquegintis scales this be adjudge against  the plaintiff in this court because quinquegintis be not a Latin word it be  true upon a writ of error bring in the exchequer Chamber he tell we that most  of the judge be of opinion that it be a good bind for five hundred pound but  no judgement be give upon the writ of error the cause be end by agreement but  all the other reporter of that case say that the word end in tribe which  always signify a hundred pound justice croak cro James d tell we that it be in  quemquegentis scales justice Yelverton Yelv e say it be in quimquegent and my  Lord roll roll Abr f in quinquegentis scales and yet judgement be give for the  defendant because five or quemquegent be a insensible word by which a man can  not be bind so in the case of Walter v piggot cro Elizabeth a the septua for  seven hundred scales have a plain signification for septua modern er p be part  of a good Latin word as seventy but sexagint can never be take for sexcenta  for there be no such word as it be hold in the case of Gery v Davis roll Abr  Yelv b and though justice croak have report it cro James c to be sexagintis  yet judgement be give for the defendant it be true if it have be sexigint or  sexingint for sixty that be good because those word have all the same  intendment and the ginta be right but quadragent for forty be wrong and so be  octigent for eighty style roll ab d sessanta instead of sixty scales have be  hold good hob cro Elizabeth e because it be a Italian bind and not intend to  be put into Latin so be eighty scales a good bind for eighty pound for it have  the same signification roll Abr f modern but the word CC quadrant in this case  be insensible there be no such Latin word and so the defendant be bind in no  sum at all and if so the plaintiff can have judgement upon this declaration  and verdict either as to the sum for that be not know nor in what year the  bind be make modern but the second and more difficult point be concern the  date of this bind which seem impossible for the year of the Lord be apply to  the year of the king reign and as to that there be a case rely on for this  purpose Brownl Yelv g videlicet the bind be full of false Latin and be  transcribe by Yelverton justice who be counsel for the plaintiff it be date  tres twenty die of the eighth month year royal power queen domini our men  James God agreeableness England Scotland c de Scotland sexto de England Lent  good luck and upon demurrer the plaintiff have judgement for in that case the  party to the bind and the sum in which the obligor be bind be sufficient  express and though there be no such year as the fortysecond year of that king  reign over England or the six of Scotland that be not hold material because a  mail may suggest a date where there be no date at all if the deed be good for  the defendant must answer that and not the date Noy h the law be hold to be so  in the reign of Edward the four yearbook Ed wonder pl Edward pl pale yellow l  e I for then a action of debt be bring on a bind in which the plaintiff  declare for so much Flemish money and show that the bind be date die of the  tenth year without say what year of the Lord or of the king when it ought to  have be year this be hold to be a void date and that the plaintiff may declare  of what date he will since the bind deliver and say primo deliberate on such a  daySalk Mod king so where debt be bring on a bind cro James roll Abr style  date the fifteen of November in the twentyfifth of Elizabeth and upon non be  factum plead the jury find that the bind be date the fifteen November in the  twentythird of Elizabeth but not seal until the eighteenth of November in the  twentysixth of Elizabeth and the court be unanimous of opinion that the  verdict be well find for the plaintiff because upon this general issue it  appear to be the defendant deed though there be a variance in the date of the  bind itself upon which the plaintiff have declare so it be hold in Goddard  case   a that the date be not any part of the substance of the deed that case  be thus Goddard as administrator bring a action of debt upon a bind against  the defendant which be make to his intestate and date the four April in the  twentyfourth of Elizabeth the defendant plead that the intestate die before  the date of that bind and conclude his plea that the write non be factum c the  jury find that the defendant do deliver it as his deed the thirty of July in  the year before at which time the intestate be live and they find the bind in  haec word but that he die before the date in April modern yet the plaintiff  have judgement for though in plead he can allege the delivery before the date  because he be estopped that be he be conclude to set forth the truth yet that  shall not conclude the jury to find it but as to this it be argue that the  variance between the date of the bind as find by the jury and the date in the  bind on which the plaintiff declare be very modern er p material for the date  in the declaration be part of the description of the bind itself and by say  pron  interrog  that be the same die et year the plaintiff have tie himself to  that very date and therefore it be necessary that shall be find it can be deny  that if he have declare on a bind bear date such a day and the bind have be  find to be of another day that have be void now this be to the same effect for  there can be no difference between geren that and pron  interrog  that be c  the date of the deed which the plaintiff have set forth in his declaration be  the only thing which can entitle he to a action and if the date of the bind  find vary from that date then there be no such bind as that upon which he have  declare if a man make a feoff in fee date the ten of SeptemberCro Elizabeth b  and the feoff recite that a feoff be make to he the eleven September give  authority to another to receive livery and seize for he secundum form paper  this be hold a void feoff because the warrant to receive livery be by a letter  of attorney which give he power to take it secundum form paper date the eleven  September when in truth the feoff be make the day before so there be no feoff  make on that day by consequence he can not have any warrant to receive livery  secundum form paper date the eleven day therefore it be hold void as to  Goddard case that can be urge as a authority against the defendant because the  jury find the date of the bind to be accord as the plaintiff have declare for  in truth the bind be date the four April the twentyfourth of Elizabeth and the  plaintiff declare upon a bind of that date and the jury find it in haec word  though the delivery be before videlicet in the lifetime of the plaintiff  intestate but here the jury have find the date of a bind which differ from  that upon which the plaintiff declare so not like this case modern in the case  of Dodson v key which be object out of YelvertonYelv a on the other side  though the year of the king be mistake as in this case yet the year of the  Lord be right which be the true reason that prevail with justice croak to give  judgement for the plaintiff in the case of lane v Plegdall cro James b the  declaration be general but in all these case the jury find it to be the deed  of the defendant though date at another time but here they have not find it to  be his deed but that he seal a certain scribe and so leave it to the court to  judge whether it be the same deed upon which the plaintiff have declare so  that if there be any variance between the find of the jury and the declaration  of the plaintiff the court can judge it to be the same bind the court hold the  date in this case to be impossible so it be a void date the plaintiff have  declare upon a bind pron  interrog  that be such a day and the jury find the  bind to be of a impossible date so that the bind find by the verdict can be  the same upon which the plaintiff have declare and upon this exception they  incline against the plaintiff but Adjournatur