atkins case doctor win canon residentiary of the church of Sarum plaintiff  bampton sayer and other canon of the same church defendant April though a dean  and chapter be reasonable in that fine they demand if a accident delay the  lease which have not happen from their fault or from the tenant yet if it be  not complete till after a new member come in he shall have his proportion in  the church of Sarum there be a dean and six canon who grant and renew lease  and divide the fine into seven part if the lease be make when the number be  complete but if during a vacancy then among the dean and residentiary accord  to their number exist on the that of October doctor eyres one of the canon die  and there be only five canon beside the dean and so continue till the that of  June when the plaintiff be elect about the time of the plaintiff election Mr  style be Willing to renew two lease for life of the manor of Melksham agree  with the canon for a fine of pound and in November deliver the old lease to  the defendant sayer to be surrender to enable the dean and chapter to make new  lease when the agreement shall be complete and the dean and chapter on the  that of November grant he two lease accord to he and his heir to hold for  three life and at the same time a licence of alienation be grant he and lease  and licence be execute and pass the common seal after the plaintiff be admit a  canon so that he become entitle to a seven part of the pound fine be pound but  the whole be receive by the dean and the other five canon which be pound each  more than they be entitle to the dean and one of the canon on a application to  they by the plaintiff pay he pound each but the four other canon refuse and  therefore thebill pray that they may account with the plaintiff for the seven  part of the fine the defendant insist that in April long before the plaintiff  election Mr style apply to the dean and chapter of Sarum to renew and on the  that of may pay pound to the defendant which amount to si apiece be soon after  divide as it be usual to divide fine in consideration whereof the dean and  chapter on the that of June the day precede the plaintiff election seal two  lease whereby they demise to Mr style and his heir the manor of Melksham for  three life which be leave in the defendant hand to be deliver to Mr style when  he surrender the old lease which be not surrender till the that of November  and the defendant sayer atkins to who the whole care be leave of finish this  affair alter the date of the lease while they be in his keep by insert the  date of the that of November instead of the that of June mere to make the date  of the lease subsequent to the date of the surrender of the that of November  and the defendant insist that the agreement enter into and sign with Mr style  for the purchase of the lease and payment of the fine and the dean and chapter  be seal new lease amount to a surrender of the old and that the surrender of  the that of November be unnecessary and consequent the lease of the that of  June immediate take effect on the seal of they and that the resealing on the  that of November be at the request of Mr Stiless agent and that the dean and  chapter comply only to satisfy his scruple and therefore the resealing after  the alteration of the date amount   no more than a confirmation of what be  before effectual and valid that the agreement with Mr style for grant lease be  full carry into execution on his part by pay the fine in may and that the dean  and chapter and residentiary at the time the agreement be make and fine pay be  alone entitle to divide the fine it appear in evidence that these leasehold  estate be in mortgage to Mr Edwin and that one of the life die application be  make on behalf of Mr style and the mortgagee to the defendant sayer for renew  they by add a new life or life and by his order the chapter clerk make two set  of lease one in Mr Stiless and the other in Mr edwin name and both be seal  together on the that of June and at the time of the seal the chapter clerk  observe to the dean and two of the canon that he think it irregular to seal  two lease of the same premise to different person and swear that he afterward  see the two lease with a rasure appear in the date which be alter and make to  bear date the that of November instead of atkins er p the that of June and  that the lease with this rasure be in the hand of the defendant sayer and  afterward in August release at the request of Mr Stiless agent he be  dissatisfy with the lease have be alter doctor clark the dean swear he  apprehend the reason induce the defendant sayer to make such alteration may be  to secure the whole fine pay on the renewal of such lease to the rest of the  chapter exclusive of the plaintiff Mr style in his examination swear that  about the that of may he give direction to pay the dean pound as a fine for  renew the lease but do not remember it ever come under his consideration when  or how the dean and chapter shall divide the money but that he can not but  look on it as a deposit in their hand for which he be to have new lease as  soon as thing atkins be ripe for the execution and delivery and that the  reason of his direct the money to be pay so incautious be owe to the press  instance of the defendant sayer who frequent by letter urge he as on the part  of the dean to the speedy performance of the agreement or else that the dean  and chapter will not think then self bind to stand to it Lord chancellor the  general question be whether the plaintiff as a canon residentiary of the  church of Sarum be entitle to a share of the fine of pound with the dean and  other canon as a residentiary exist and have a right at the time it must be  admit to be the general rule that where a lease be make by these corporate  body seal under the common seal for no interest can pass out of they at law  but under the common seal they be entitle to divide the money arise from the  fine in equal proportion among they in some case and in other the dean have a  double share to the rest of the chapter the first question be when the lease  be real and effectual make in law to Mr style now sir Francis eyles style the  lessee this be very easy resolve in point of law to be sure it be not a  substantial effectual lease till seal in for as to the seal in the day before  the plaintiff election it be admit at the bar that be invalid for want of a  surrender of the old lease or it will have be a lease for four life and within  the disable statute and no man in their sense will set their seal to lease  give a right to two different set of person for their life the same day  therefore they can have no apprehension they have make a effectual lease and  bind upon the body corporate as to the alter the date from the that of June to  the that of November it show plain Mr sayer himself do not apprehend the  former be valid lease so that they be ineffectual not only in point of law but  even in the apprehension of the party till when Mr style the lessee find out  the management against himself and insist upon a effectual lease if it be not  a substantial lease in point of law consider it next on the foot of equity it  have be insist on the part of the defendant that if there be such a agreement  in may and June as bind both party in a court of equity this court though  executory will carry it into execution and therefore be to be consider as  final and complete from that time atkins there be many case with relation to  private person where agreement have be consider as bind and the court will  carry they into execution but will not hold general as to agreement make with  aggregate body then the question will be what have be do in the present case  on the side of the plaintiff it be call a deposit only and on the side of the  defendant a payment and that the body corporate be bind by it body corporate  especial ecclesiastical differ extreme from private person I do not give any  opinion on the case I be go to put but suppose a body corporate have a power  make a agreement for a renewal and the fine be pay I will not say the court  will not compel they to execute a lease notwithstanding a new member be  introduce among they because as they have a power over the legal estate they  have a power over the equitable but then there will be a great difference  where the agreement for the contract be not fix and certain but may be vary  for here be a question between themselves how the contract be to be make  suppose there be a enhance of the fine on the delay of the tenant apply to  renew that will not alter the right of the new member as to his proportionable  share of the fine I will go further still suppose the court shall consider a  agreement to do a act by a dean and chapter as do where the dean and chapter  have full power over the revenue and the tenant full power to renew their  estate hold of they yet atkins er p it will prove nothing in the present case  for that will bring it to the question whether this be such a agreement as  they be bind by I be of opinion this be not a bind agreement for it all depend  upon the will of Mr Edwin the mortgagee who be no party to the agreement  suppose a dean and chapter be very reasonable in the fine they demand and any  accident delay the lease which have not at all happen from the fault of the  dean and chapter or even from the tenant but from some particular circumstance  yet if the lease be not complete till the new member come in he shall have his  proportion a blank be leave for the life in the lease that be seal on the that  of June and the dean and chapter be not oblige to accept of the life that  shall be name afterward and Mr style say he understand it as a deposit only  because the dean and chapter may if they please disapprove of the life atkins  beside this here be Mr Edwin in the case who have the legal interest and a  right to be consult as to the surrender of the old lease for I be of opinion  if he have refuse to surrender a court of equity will not have compel he as he  be a encumbrancer for he may have object to the life propose and insist the  life in be be better or oblige the tenant the mortgagor to have propose other  life or redeem he indeed if it have be a chattel interest and lease for year  only it will have be otherwise for then upon surrender the old in which there  be only a remainder of a term to come a new and long term will have be grant  which be a advantage to the mortgagee as be a better security Mr Edwin do not  surrender the lease nor be any order send by Mr style for execute new lease  till November the plaintiff be elect the that of June before and therefore be  entitle to a share of the fine accident may have happen in the intermediate  time of death in the corporate body or of session upon their be prefer which  may have make a majority of new member in that case it will have be absurd  that a minority shall have insist the agreement be bind and ought to have be  carry into execution by a letter of the that of August from sir John eyles Mr  Stiless father to the defendant sayer it appear that it be owe to the  misfortune of the mortgagee refuse to surrender the affair be not finish sir  John eyles act for his son and therefore this import that the son understand  the payment of the thousand guinea to be as a deposit only and have no  apprehension the dean and chapter intend to divide it till the whole contract  be perform another letter to sayer of the saint of August have be read import  what defendant call a agreement be not bind but require a further agreement  then at what time be the consent of the lessee that the dean and chapter shall  divide it among they certain not till August and seem to I so plain that I be  of opinion there be no agreement that can bind this body corporate or lessee  till after the surrender and Mr Edwin the mortgagee come in take it then  either in law or equity it be a clear case that the plaintiff be entitle to  his share of the fine atkins still it have be say that these be uncertain  outcome and a dean and chapter therefore be justify in get they as soon as  possible and that the agreement with a lessee and payment of a fine bind the  body corporate and if a body corporate make a agreement with a person to grant  he a lease and the money be pay I will not S a court of equity will not carry  it into execution probable it will though some of the member of that body be  want but a dean and chapter ought to consider themselves as trustee for their  successor and not suffer any immediate advantage to themselves in fill up  vacant life to bias their mind in take a lesser fine to the prejudice of the  succession they have a trust repose in they by the crown or by their founder  for the benefit of the succession as well as for themselves and they ought to  have the succession principal in view and though where the matter be finish  and complete a court of equity can set it aside yet they will not strain to  support such a contract upon the whole I be of opinion the plaintiff be  entitle to a decree for his demand and on the circumstance of the case to his  cost from all the defendant and his lordship decree accord Reg lib b fol  atkins er p