Bambridge against whitton and his wife in a ejection firm upon not guilty  plead a special verdict be find the case upon the special verdict be march  report this a copyhold tenant in fee do surrender into the hand of two tenant  unto the use of I W immediate after his death and whether it be a good  surrender or no be the question Harris that the surrender be void estate of  copyhold ought to be direct by the rule of law as be say in Rep b Rep Rep and  as in a grant a grant to one in ventre sa mire be void so also in a will or  devise and as it be resolve in dyer p so it have be adjudge that the surrender  to the use of a infant in ventre sa mire be void and as at commonlaw a  freehold can begin in going to be so neither a copyhold for so the surrender  shall have a particular estate in he without a donor or lessor which by the  rule of law can be and he take a difference march report er p betwixt a devise  by will a grant execute in a devise it man be good but not in a grant execute  and here he take a difference where the grant be by one entire clause or  sentence and where it be by several clause e tail dyer p Com b Rep Dowties  case and Rep Doddingtons case for instance I will put only the case in dyer  and the comment a termor grant his term habendum after his death there the  habendum only be void and the grant good but if he grant his term after his  death there the whole grant be void because it be but one sentence so I say in  our case because it be but one clause the whole grant be void another  difference be where the distinct clause be repugnant and where not where it be  repugnant there it be void and the grant good because utile per inutile non to  make faulty but in our case as I have say before it be one entire sentence m  or James in this court rot simpson and Southwells case the very case with our  case there be a surrender of a copytenant to the use of a infant in v enter  savzier after the death of the surrender and there it be resolve by all the  judge except dodderidge that the surrender be void first because it be to the  use of a infant in ventre sa mire and second because it be to begin in going  to be which be contrary to the rule in law and copytenants as it be there say  ought to be guide by the rule of law but dodderidge doubt of it and he agree  the march report case at commonlaw that a freehold can not commence in going  to be but he doubt of a copyhold and he put the case of surrender to the use  of a will but he say that judgement be afterward give by coke chief justice in  the name of all the other judge that the surrender be void and therefore quod  to express grief nothing to take in hand per billam therefore he conclude that  the surrender be void and pray the judgement of the court