case attorneygeneral versus mayor of Coventry Lord chancellor Cowper vern  grantee of feefarm rend have the same power of distress as the king have and  so may distrain on other land of the tenant though not subject to the rend the  earl of Aylesford be entitle in feesimple to a feefarmrent of pound per annum  reserve to the crown upon the grant of king Edward of diverse franchise to the  corporation of Coventry which rend be among other sell by the crown by virtue  of the statute of car cap for the advance of the sale of feefarm rend become  vest in the say earl and by the word of the above mention statute as full a  remedy be give to the king patentee their heir and assign as the king himself  have except a extent so that the earl of Aylesford among other privilege may  undoubted have distrain for this feefarmrent upon any other of the land belong  to the corporation of Coventry but the land of that corporation be under peer  William sequestration for the nonpayment of a sum of money decree to belong to  sir Thomas white charity this make the difficulty and the Lord chancellor have  call to his assistance the chief justice Parker and king hold first that the  king may reserve a rend out of a franchise or matter incorporeal as well as  out of land and may distrain on any other land of the tenant for it second  that though by virtue of the say statute of car the grantee of a feefarmrent  have the like remedy by way of distress as the king himself have yet that such  other land must be in the actual possession of the tenant for if the tenant  shall have make any lease for year or at will only the good or chattel of such  a underlessee be not distrainable even by the king and consequent not by his  grantee three that as any lease make by the king tenant of the land not hold  of the king will prevent even the king distress so if there be a extent upon a  elegit of such other land the good or chattel upon the premise so extend will  not be liable for this be a great estate than a estate at will but it be say a  sequestration be only in nature of a to lift up at commonlaw and that the  party sequester have no law ad remember well in re the legal estate of the  premise remain in every respect as before and that it will be a peer William  extreme hardship if such process of sequestration shall be allow to be make  use of to binder a plain precedent right of another on the other side it be  argue that since a sequestration be the execution and life of a court of  equity and be the fruit of a long suit so for that reason it ought to be  favour however the matter end in this Ache Lord chancellor hold he can not as  be pray order the sequestrator to pay the arrear of the feefarmrent out of the  money or rend sequester in regard earl of Aylesford the claimant thereof have  no decree or bill for the same nor be there any contempt on which the court  can ground a sequestration as to the say earl in respect to his feefarmrent so  as to let he have the benefit of this sequestration and shall the sequestrator  be order to pay he the arrear of the feefarmrent this will be to put the earl  in a better condition than he will have be in have there be no sequestration  wherefore the court order that the earl of Aylesford shall be at liberty to  distrain for his rend at law without incur any contempt in equity and that no  lease or estate derive under the sequestrator shall be make use of in evidence  against the claimant of the feefarmrent to prevent the distress afterward c I  Parker inform I that he think it may have be proper to have determine that the  sequestration be as the hand of the court upon the estate and where a right to  a feefarmrent appear to be prior and indisputable the court may reasonable  enough have order payment else the earl for ought appear will be in a worse  condition than if there have be no sequestration for peer William till the  sequestration the corporation pay the feefarmrent voluntary and now they were  disable pure by the sequestration and put the earl to distrain be put the  charge of this suit upon the estate whereas nothing appear to the contrary but  that the corporation be sensible of the earl right to the rend and desire it  may be pay peer William er p as to the king power of distress on any land of  the tenant though not hold of the king   roll Abr roll Abr Inst Inst lane be  cite as to the nature and operation of a sequestration vide Bligh v earl of  Darnley post Vol two Wharam v Broughton ves desbrow v Crommie bunb hide v  Greenhill dick Barnsley v Powell ib bray v Hooker dick hale v shaftoe ib I Ves  jun Cox S c shaw v wright Ves simmonds v Kinnaird Ves angel v smith Ves Fenton  v Lowther Cox pain v draw east Dixon v smith swan Dickinson v smith mad any  person make claim to the property sequester shall be examine upon  interrogatory pro interest his and if he shall appear to have title paramount  to the sequestration it shall be discharge as against he with or without cost  accord to the circumstance of the case pale yellow forum of Rome harrison  pract edit Newl Wharam v Broughton ves and see hunt v priest dick anon Ves  angel v smith Ves Dixon v smith swan brook v Greathed I W key v Cunningham mad  peer William de term paschae