case bradford against brien a award which except part of a matter in dispute  and leaves the party to prosecute his right therein at law be bad the  plaintiff bring a action of debt on a arbitration bind bear date the  thirtiethof July and on oyer the condition appear to be to abide by the award  of e e in all action suit controversy and demand so as the say award be make  and ready to be deliver to the party before the eight of August follow the  defendant plead that no award be make the plaintiff reply that there be a  award make and ready to be deliver before the eight of August follow and set  forth modern the award and that the arbitrator award that all action suit  controversy c before the thirty of July shall cease for ever and that before  the October follow the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff fourteen pound  sixteen shilling and sixpence and that the sixteen shilling and sixpence shall  be in full for all tithe and that the party shall by deed release to each  other all demand c and lie the breach in nonpayment of the fourteen pound  sixteen shilling and sixpence the defendant rejoin that in the award there be  a exception of all tithe calf and that the plaintiff shall be at liberty to  prosecute his right to tithe calf at law if he have any right thereto the  plaintiff state by protestation that tithe calf be not except demurrer the  defendant join in demurrer will chief justice deliver the opinion of three of  the judge videlicet his own opinion and the opinion of Parker justice and  William fortescue justice fortescue aland justice doubt and be absent there be  but one question in this case which be whether the award be good or not and  there be but one objection to it videlicet that all matter in dispute be  submit and yet all matter in dispute be not determine the tithe of calf be  except the rule as it be lie down in the book be that when the submission be  conditional namely with a ita quod a award be make of the premise the award  must be final as to all matter within the submission of which the arbitrator  have notice and that it can be modern er p good in part and bad in part cro  Elizabeth cro James Lutw a so that it be now settle that the conditional word  will make the award void if it do not extend to and be final in all matter  within the submission and in the present case the arbitrator take notice of a  difference subsist between they for tithe of calf the word in the submission  in this case be so as the say award and do not say of the premise but the word  in cro Elizabeth be the same award which in my opinion do not differ from this  but the case in lutwych have the same word which be use here and be a  authority in point for my own part I will carry this matter as far as any  court have go before I and if it be a new case though there be not word of  condition in the submission I shall incline to make a award which be not final  in all the thing submit entire void for the party otherwise have not the  benefit they propose by the award this no doubt be a conditional award and for  that reason be entire void but as my brother fortescue aland be not here and  have some doubt in this case it will be proper to inform you of they what be  go upon be that it be a final award at the beginning and therefore the  exception which follow be void and for his opinion he quote Mod salk but that  case differ in two respect modern from this first this award do not direct  that this suit shall cease but that the plaintiff shall be at liberty to  prosecute his right to the tithe calf at law but the award in that case say  that all suit between the party shall cease and second in that case the word  be suit now depend which be not in the present case one thing which stick a  little with I be that the plaintiff agree that he shall be at liberty to sue  at law for the tithe calf and that the defendant agree to it too which may  seem to take it out of the award for consensus to lift wandering but two  question arise which answer that doubt first whether such a agreement can be  admit and second whether such a agreement be sufficient to alter the first  submission it be a rule that all matter of fact well plead be allow by the  demurrer and though the plaintiff endeavour by his protestation not to be  conclude it signify nothing but the defendant confess only there be such a  award in which the arbitrator say so and so but not that what they say be true  and second the first submission be under hand and seal but this agreement be  not and therefore can defeat the first submission on the whole if the award be  void the defendant be in the right to say there be no award and therefore  judgement must be for he modern michaelmas term the fourteenth of George the  second in the common plea sir John will Knt chief justice sir Parker Knt sir  John fortescue aland Knt sir William fortescue Knt justice sir Dudley rider  Kilt attorneygeneral sir John strange Knt solicitor general