case Howson against denham on a covenant upon assignment of debt not to do any  act or thing whereby the plaintiff shall be hinder from receive the say debt  quaere whether a breach that he release one I S so much money due and owe to c  be well assign without show how the release be make Writ of error bring in the  exchequerchamber upon a judgement give in action of covenant by nothing to say  in the king bench and the general error assign a Hilary term James b r latch b  Bulst c Bulst d Trinity term car b r cro car e Stroud v blundel roll Abr f in  the king bench Trinity term car side g side h easter term car I march page  case king in the king bench mich term style shower KB er p the error they  assign over as far as when they come to argue it be in the set forth of the  breach which be on a covenant upon assignment of debt not to do any act or  thing whereby the plaintiff shall be hinder from his receive the say debt and  the breach be assign thus quod relaxavi cuidan I S top c and do not say how so  that it can by any mean appear to the court whether such release be sufficient  to discharge the debt for he ought to have set forth the deed if it be by deed  c and Mr Bonython cite the case of Chantflower v priestly a where breach be  assign in covenant that he be disturb in the enjoyment of a copperass and the  error assign be that he do not show by who he be disturb or that he be fixed  by law modus disturb for though he need not set forth the particular special  title by which he be disturb yet he ought to show such a disturbance as may  appear to have be unlawful if a discharge be plead he ought to show how it be  for if it be not sufficient it be no discharge and the sufficiency be matter  in law and therefore must be see and judge by the court and so be Edward fol  cite in hob I be of counsel with the defendant in the writ of error argue that  it be well enough that relaxavi be shower KB sufficient that it ought to be  intend a effectual release and we have lie per quod we can not recover the say  debt beside it be a transaction between three person we be no party thereto  the release be in a debtor hand and we have no mean to come by it and to say  it be by deed will be unadvisable in we for perhaps it be a parole release  which will be good to discharge a debt by simple contract and for any thing  that appear here it be such a debt and release be the strong word we can use  and for the authority cite they be answer by themselves in that of Chantflower  v priestly the covenant be for enjoyment without lawful disturbance and the  exception there allow be that he have not say that he be lawful disturb and  for that in Hobart it be a case of tithe which be Payable de jure and of  common right and he that will plead a discharge from they ought to set forth  how but we be a different case but we have say relaxavi which be more than the  word to free and yet that have be allow sufficient and so it be in the case of  prideux v Rawlins b and hold not erroneous though it do not set forth how and  the judgement be affirm be upon a writ of error out of a inferior court then I  cite the case of Langden v Stokes c assumpsit on a valuable consideration to  go such a voyage in such a ship before August follow and allege a breach in  not go the voyage the defendant plead that before any breach the plaintiff at  the c the four of April to free the dawn of the say promise to which the  plaintiff demurrer and roll argue that this plead a discharge without show how  be not good and cite the book Mr Bonython mention of Edward that uninjured  conservavi or to free be no plea but Maynard for the defendant argue to the  contrary that forasmuch as this be a action ground upon a promise by word it  may be discharge by word before the breach thereof and therefore to free  general be a good plea and he cite Henry and of this opinion be all the court  and shower KB Richardson chief justice say he know it have be so resolve  diverse time and the rule be remember eoden modus quo be born eoden modus to  take apart wherefore it be adjudge for the defendant quod to express grief nil  to take in hand per billam also that very case be agree for law in the case of  Edward v week d where the difference be make between a discharge or release  before breach and after but in both of these case it be agree that the plea of  to free general be a good plea because it may be release by parole and so may  a debt upon a single contract as our case be but levinz justice doubt say that  true it be we need not produce the deed of release in plead where it be to a  three person and we claim not under he nor have any mean to come by it but we  must say whether it be by deed or no or how and that we have the same mean to  come to the knowledge thereof as of the matter itself videlicet that such a  debt be release beside here say he you do not a Yelv b in the king bench in  Hilary term car c cro car d Mod shower KB er p so much as say that the debt be  discharge by it for there may be a release give which may be of none effect I  answer that we have say that he do release to one I S so much money owe and  due to c which be as much as say that he do absolute acquit and discharge he  and we be much strong than if we have say fecit quandan relaxationem but  however the court adjourn the matter to another term