Page:Prerogatives of the Crown.djvu/387

Ch.XIII. Sec. III.] Traverse.— Resisting Extents. S67 payment of a bill of exchange, tainted with usury in its original formation. The effects being seized as the property of the defendant, it is of course unnecessary for him to claim in his pleadings any property in them. He merely disputes the Crown debt ; if that be unfounded, his right to the property remains or reverts to him as a matter of course. But where third persons claim in a representative capacity, under the defendant, as assignees of the defendant, a bankrupt, they must deduce title from him ; and in such case the assignees must shew, separately, every fact entitling them to maintain the character they assume [a). It is however highly worthy of observation, that where the extent is not against the immediate Crown debtor, but against his debtor, or other debtor in the third or other degree, such debter in the second, third or other degree, may, in disputing the debt due from him (the party pleading) to the Crown debtor, set up any defence, whether given by statute or not, which he might have insisted upon if he were sued by his immediate creditor, the Crown debtor (6). As in the case of an extent by the Crown against B» who owed money to A., the Crown debtor, B. may plead a set off, &c. to the debt due fix)m him (B.) to A. And the reason is, that the Crown in seizing the debts due to its debtor, cannot be in a better situa- tion with respect to the right to such debt, than the Crown debtor himself; a better remedy only, not a better right, is claimed by the King (c). The debtor in the second or third degree may also contest the right of the Crown to issue an extent, on the debt alleged to be due from the Crown debtor. In no case can a defendant plead double or several matters in the case of the Crown, under the statute 4 and 5 Ann, c. 1 6. {d). But he may plead separately to distinct parts of the inquisition ; or plead as to one part, and demur to another distinct and independent matter [e). And where the Crown claims by two or more distinct titles, each must be tra- versed {f) : otherwise where there are two inquisitions finding the same title {g), (a) West, 196. See Ibid. 177, 8, Price, 23. 197 ; where the best mode of proceed- (e) Trem. PI. 582. 2 Manning, ing in such case is clearly pointed out. 598, 9. (A) Ante, 305, 327. (/) Ibid, and 601, 2. Ante, 357. (c) 2 Manning, 593. (g) Ibid. 2 Manning, 601, 2. (<^) Parker, 13. Forrest's R. 57. 1 It