case swain against Stephens ante page trover be within the statute of  limitation sand Mod stram Bac ab the exception in the James c as to person be  beyond sea extend only to creditor and not to debtor lev Mod show Mod vern  will salk Fitzherbert Prec Charles ante a replication vary from the count upon  any immaterial point be no departure ante in trover for a ship and good if it  be allege that the plaintiff sell they beyond sea that he return on such a day  and that after on demand make he refuse to deliver they it shall be intend  that they come a second time to the defendant hand term Rep this case be now  move by calthrop for the plaintiff none be there for the defendant first that  a action of trover be not within the statute of limitation of James c but all  the court One voice overrule it for although it be not particular mention in  the clause of limitation yet it be under the general word of action upon the  case and it appear express that it be so intend by the last proviso in the  statute wherein action of trover be especial mention a second question be the  defendant be beyond sea at the time when the statute be make and until primo  caroli whether the plaintiff be to be relieve by the equity of the statute  although he be not within the express word of the last proviso for that  provide only where the plaintiff be over the sea to have his action when he  return if he bring his action within the year after his return but there be no  mention when the defendant be over the sea of enlarge the time a and it be  strong croak car urge by Grimston for the plaintiff that he be within the  equity of the say proviso for it will be useless et fool labour to sue one to  outlawry be beyond sea when it be erroneous and reversable at his return Jones  and Berkley justice be of that opinion that the defendaut be beyond sea be  within the equity and intention of the statute as well as where the plaintiff  be beyond sea Richardson chief justice doubt thereof and say that he will not  deliver any opinion but I conceive that the defendant be beyond sea be not  within the equity of the statute for the statute provide remedy where the  plaintiff be over sea and omit where the defendant c do it purposely and never  intend to provide any remedy for he because the plaintiff may prosecute his  suit by original although the defendant be beyond sea unto a outlawry which  will show there be not any remissness a vide car c which declare their  privilege and a treatise on their law publish by authority at Truro that  September Geo vol vo b Mod vern a but now by Ann c if any person against who a  action lie by James c be beyond sea at the time that the cause of such action  accrue the plaintiff may bring his action within the same time after his  return as be limit for such action by the James c croak car er p in he which  be the matter which the law intend and that there shall be a fresh prosecution  and when the defendant reverse the outlawry the plaintiff shall then know  where he be to prosecute the suit against he so the first original be not mere  a fruitless and idle labour but thereby preserve his action three for the  departure from the declaration c Richardson Jones and Berkley hold that the  replication be no departure but be pursuant to the count and fortify it but I  conceive it be a departure because it vary in the matter and in the time for  the declaration suppose a possession of the good and that saint march James he  lose they and the same day the defendant find they and the saint October car  convert they and the plaintiff in his replication show that he the say saint  march James deliver they to the defendant to transport unto t in Spain and to  redeliver they upon request and after show that the defendant saint march  James at saint t sell and convert they to his own use so it vary in the point  how the good come to the defendant hand both for the matter and time fourthly  they hold when it be allege that the defendant return from beyond sea I car  and that the plaintiff car require the redelivery and he refuse and afterward  the same saint October car convert they to his proper use it shall be intend  that the say good come a second time to the defendant hand and that they be in  his hand the plaintiff require the delivery of they and that afterward the  same day be convert they and that upon this conversion the plaintiff have  ground his action and the plaintiff have election upon which conversion he  will bring his action and then he be clear out of the say statute of James c  the action be bring within two year after the last conversion and so well  bring but I doubt how this action shall be maintain without show how they come  to the defendant hand where it be allow that once he sell they in James and  convert the money to his proper use and the allegation that he after refuse to  deliver and convert they to his proper use without show how be but the other  three justice be come to they can be good against I they give rule that  judgement shall be enter for the plaintiff unless c