Ch. XII. Pt. I. Sec. IIL] Ea:tents. 275 must be returnable on a general return day in Term ; and, at least when the capias clause is introduced, is irregular if a Term intervene between the teste and the return [a). A mistake in the teste may be rectified, it appears, by the Baron's fiat (6). The writ may be issued in vacation, and before the commis- sion, when necessary is returnable, though not, it seems, before it is actually returned and filed (c). Any number of extents may issue into different counties at the same time. Before or after the return of the first extent, any number of extents may issue with the same teste as the first extent, z. e, of the date of the fiat. If they issue before the return of the first extent, they may issue as a matter of course ; if they do not issue till after the return of the first extent, a mo- tion must be made in Court, on affidavit, of special circum- stances {d before they can issue. It seems, that the affidavit ought at least to state, that the effects seized under the first extent are insufficient to pay the debt. If the teste be prior to the death of the defendant, the ex- tent may, like any other execution {e be issued against his effects after his death, on the ground that the fiat, with refer- ence to which the teste is generally, if not invariably, inserted, binds his effects from the day on which it is dated (/ ). And, as we shall hereafter observe, even an action at the suit of tlie Crown, does not abate by the death of the defendant {g If an extent be set aside for any irregularity, which does not effect the fiat, a new extent, tested as of the date of the fiat, |nay be issued {h). And from this it appears, that it is generally useless for the defendant to move to set aside an extent for any formal defect in it subsequent to the fiat, since a new extent of the same teste as the first may be issued, even if the defendant succeed in setting the first aside. But this observation does not apply to the case where a stranger moves to set aside an extent, under which his property has been improperly tai- ken (e). (a) 2 Manning, 530. 7 Mod. 17. (/) West, 60. (6) West, 58. (g) 2 Cro. 481. Post, 280. (c) 3 Price, 288. h) West, 60, note f. 3 Price, 269. d) Parker, 35, 176, 282. And see Parker, 271, 35, 176, 282. As to in- West, 59. 3 Price, 369. quisition being tet aside, post, cb, 13. («?) See 1 Ld. Raym. 695. 2 Ibid. s.2. Ante, this cii. 850. 7 T. R. 20. 1 B. and P. 571. (i) West, 60 and 333. <i T. R. 368. t2 It
