case Godolphin against tudor easter term whether roll if a person bold a  auditor office for life and depute another to exercise the say office during  his good behaviour a bind give by such deputy to pay his principal yearly  during the say deputation two hundred pound and that in consideration thereof  the deputy shall have all the rend and profit of the say office to his own use  be void by the statute Edward c for it be a bind to pay a certain sum at all  event SC ante SC salk SC salk debt upon a bind condition for performance of  article the condition recite that whereas sir William Godolphin be auditor of  Wales for his life and have depute the defendant testator to exercise his say  office during his good behaviour and that the defendant pro deputation pillage  do agree to pay he yearly during the say deputation two hundred pound in  consideration whereof the defendant testator shall have all the rend and  profit of his say office to his the defendant use and likewise save the  plaintiff harmless c and the bind be for performance thereof the defendant  plead the statute of Edward c c make bind and security c for certain office  void without the necessary averment c the plaintiff reply that the say office  bad a fix salary of twenty pound ayear belong to it and that during the whole  time of the say deputation the annual just and legal profit of the say office  do amount to three hundred and twentynine pound and ten shilling and that  during all the aforesaid time the defendant do receive yearly the say sum of  three hundred and twentynine pound and ten shilling out of the exchequer for  the fee and profit of the say office to his own use and assign breach in not  pay the say two hundred pound for so many c the defendant rejoin the same  matter as in the replication and demurrer the case be three time argue in this  and the two precedent term the court be clear of opinion against the plaintiff  and take this diversity that if a office describe by the statute have a  certain salary annex to it a deputation of such office reserve a sum less than  the stand salary will not be modern er p within the statute so if fee be  uncertain and no certain salary annex to the office reserve a certain sum out  of the fee will not be within the statute because in that case if the fee  answer not the sum certain the deputy be not to pay the sum certain it be  Payable out of the profit but here the event will not help it it be void at  first for the fee be thing arise from the business of the office which may be  more or less they must be uncertain and yet the defendant testator at all  event be to pay a sum certain let the fee be more or less see Ellis v Nelson  keb a so they advice the plaintiff to discontinue which he deny judgement be  give for the defendant on the last day of the term and the say diversity allow  and confirm for good law modern for if one reserve a sum certain upon a  deputation out of the profit or fee he only reserve part of that which be  whole his before for though by make a deputy the whole power of the principal  be in the deputy yet the fee or profit do not pass and the deputy have no  right to they then if he make a deputy reserve a sum certain part of the  profit and the rest to deputy he may well do it for it be but reserve part of  what be whole his see the case of Garforth v Fearon I h Bl Rep b note if one  put in a deputy without any allowance of salary he have no remedy but by  quantum to deserve and that against his principal