MAXIMS OF THE LAW. 149 



and bars might be pleaded cross, either of them, in the 

 contrary suit ; and so the party altogether prevented and 

 intercepted to come by his right. 



So if a man be attainted by two several attainders, and 

 there is error in them both, there is no reason but there 

 should be a remedy open for the heir to reverse those at 

 tainders being erroneous, as well if they be twenty as one. 



And, therefore, if in a writ of error brought by the 

 heir of one of them, the attainder should be a plea peremp 

 torily ; and so again, if in error brought of that other, 

 the former should be a plea; these were to exclude him 

 utterly of his right: and therefore it shall be a good 

 replication to say, that he hath a writ of error depending 

 of that also, and so the court shall proceed : but no judg 

 ment shall be given till both pleas be discussed ; and if 

 either plea be found without error, there shall be no 

 reversal either of the one or of the other ; and if he discon 

 tinue either writ, then shall it be no longer a plea; and so 

 of several outlawries in a personal action. 



And this seemeth to me more reasonable, than that gene 

 rally an outlawry or an attainder should be no plea in a 

 writ of error brought upon a diverse outlawry or attainder, 

 as 7 H. IV. and 7. H. VI. seem to hold; for that is a 

 remedy too large for the mischief; for there is no reason 

 but if any of the outlawries or attainders be indeed without 

 error, but it should be a peremptory plea to the person 

 in a writ of error, as well as in any other action. 



But if a man levy a fine sur conusaunce de droit come ceo 

 que il ad de son done, and suffer a recovery of the same 

 lands, and there be error in them both, he cannot bring 

 error first of the fine, because, by the recovery, his title of 

 error is discharged and released in law inclusive but he 

 must begin with the error upon the recovery, which he 37 11. 

 may do, because a fine executed barreth no titles that 

 accrue de puisne terns after the fine levied, and so restore 

 himself to his title of error upon the fine : but so it is not 

 in the former case of the attainder ; for a writ of error to 

 a former attainder is not given away by a second, except it 

 be by express words of an act of parliament, but only it 

 remaineth a plea to his person while he liveth, and to the 

 conveyance of his heir after his death. 



But if a man levy a fine where he hath nothing in the 

 land, which inureth by way of conclusion only, and is exe 

 cutory against all purchases and new titles which shall 

 grow to the conusor afterwards, and he purchase the land, 



