his day but defaults on the first, second, third and fourth days, the tenant being  present? The demandant will lose his writ by his default and the tenant will retain  his land which he was to lose by his default, as [in the roll] of Michaelmas term in  the third and the beginning of the fourth years of king Henry, near the middle of  the roll.1 If neither appears, then, one default balancing the other,2 the demandant  will obtain on another day, when he appears3 by the tenant's default.
If one defaults in a mixed action.
 4Mixed actions are those which are both in rem and in personam, where both are  actor and both reus, [but he is the actor who first brings the matter to court,]5 as  between co-heir parceners, where a parcener claims his reasonable share against a  co-heir parcener, as where the inheritance is partible either by reason of the thing  or the persons. Also where a thing held in common is partible among parceners who  are not co-heirs, and one sues against his parcener to have the common property  divided. Also where a dispute arises between neighbours as to the boundaries of  holdings, and one of the neighbours asks that reasonable boundaries be fixed between  him and his neighbour.6 All these mixed actions ought to be counted among  actions in rem, not in personam. For that reason, if one defaults in these three  actions or others like them, let the process against him be that against those who  default in a real action. In all actions where two distraints run together, that is, in  rem and in personam, that distraint is to apply which is more coercive and binds  more strictly.7
If two actions, one personal the other real, lie against a man in one writ.
 8When two actions are contained in one writ, one in personam and the other in rem,  as where one is summoned to appear and show by what warrant he holds such land,  and it is then added which the lord king claims is his escheat (or of his ancient  demesne) since here two distraints run together, that one is to apply which binds  more strictly, as was said above, that is, that the land be seized into the king's hand,  though some do the contrary. If [the actions are] in different writs, the distraint9 as  to each of them would be made by itself. If default were made in the writ of quo  warranto, the matter would proceed to attachment, not to seizure of the land, and  conversely in the other writ. If one impetrates a writ of quo warranto or quo jure