CCCCVII sir henry roll and OSBORNS case sir Henry roll bring a writ of  warrantia paper against sir Robert Osborn and Katherine his wife and show that  the defendant ought to warrant he a message acre of land acre of pasture in  Kelmarsh and show that sir Robert Osborn and his wife levy a fine to he and  his heir of a manor and of the land aforesaid with warranty to he and his heir  and further show that a writ of enter sur seize be bring against he of the say  message acre of land acre of pasture and that he have demand the warranty of  the defendant or that he will minister to he a plea which the defendant have  refuse to do to his damage of the defendant confess the fine and warranty as  aforesaid but further plead that in the same term that the fine be levy a writ  of entry be bring against sir Henry roll in which writ he vouch to warrant the  say Leonard er p defendant who alone enter into the warranty and vouch over  the common vouchee and so a recovery be have accord and aver that the say  recovery be to the use of sir Henry roll for his life and if there be a  marriage between he and a S within year and there to the use of the say a S  for her jointure with diverse remainder Leonard over and aver the life of sir  h roll upon which the plaintiff do demurrer in law Shirley sergeant argue for  the plaintiff that the warranty be not destroy but that the plaintiff may well  maintain his warrantia paper and for the same he vouch h Clifford case that  there ought to be a alteration of the estate to which the warranty be annex  and here be no alteration of the estate for although the recovery be have the  say term and a voucher upon it yet because the use do not take effect present  but be contingent use he remain tenant in feesimple as he be before and so the  first warranty remain and be not destroy Montague sergeant contrary and that  the warrantia paper be go and that for four cause he who come to a estate in  the post shall not have a warrantia paper but sir Henry roll come to the  estate in the post ergo be shall not have warrantia paper and for that vide  ass Lord by escheat shall not have warrantia paper ass the lord of a villain  shall not have a warrantia paper h seize shall not have warrantia paper and so  h h tenant by the courtesy shall not have the writ because all these come to  the land in the post but see cook part Lincoln college case they may have  peradventure benefit of a rend or of a condition but not of a warranty h Garr  Statham send for every warranty ought to have the same estate continue to  which the warranty be annex but sir Henry roll have not the same estate  continue ergo he shall not have the warranty because the fine be to he and his  heir with warranty but this recovery which be but a further assurance be but  to the use of himself for life with diverse remainder over so as the first  estate be alter and e e it be a good plea in a warrantia paper that the  demandant be not tenant and Elizabeth in bointon Chesters case it be adjudge  in this court that if a man make a feoff with warranty who feoff the first  feoff upon condition that that warranty remain be shall vouch by reason of the  first warranty but if upon that feoff he have limit any new use there because  the estate be alter the voucher be go vide f n b e t voucher e ace and it be  resolve Elizabeth in banc king in kempe Henninghams case that in such case he  shall not have several warrantia chart and therefore because in the principal  case he have once vouch upon this recovery and upon that the estate be alter  he can now have warrantia paper every warranty be a covenant real which  consist in privity and therefore destroy the privity and the warranty be go  but now in this case the first privity be destroy therefore the warranty be go  and therefore h if two joyntenants be with warranty and one of they make a  feoff in fee Leonard the warranty be destroy because the first privity be  destroy h ace but vide e Statham Garr if two joyntenants be with warranty and  the one release to the feoff there the warranty remain because the privity  remain vide h cook part chudleighs case ace and see m Elizabeth in this court  king and Watts case land be give to husband and wife and to the heir of the  body of the husband and wife the husband levy a fine and die without issue the  wife be implead and adjudge that she can not have aid nor warrantia paper  because the estate be bind by the fine the husband be tenant in special tail  No warranty can have but one recompense and if there be recompense give the  warranty be go and extinct but here be a recompense make by the voucher in  this recovery therefore the warranty be extinct ass pl e garr ace and e e if  he will not take advantage of the warranty when he may be shall never have it  after vide f n b ace and Elizabeth it be adjudge in Owen case that if tenant  in tail bargain and sell his land and suffer a recovery and afterward enrol  the deed that that recovery be a good bar to the estate tail because there be  a supposition of recompense and so he pray judgement for the defendant it be  adjourn vide this case now resolve in the Lord Hoberts report hob Rep more Rep  Brownl Leonard er p blank page Owen er p Owen report the report of that late  reverend and learned judge thomas Owen esquire one of the justice of the  common plea wherein be many choice case most of they through argue by the  learned sergeant and after argue and resolve by the grave judge of those time  with many case wherein the difference in the yearbooks be reconcile and  explain Owen boundary pasch year Elizabeth