case Stephens against potter a presentation by the king of a church in right  of a ware may be either under the great seal or the seal of the court of ware  but if it be not in right of a ware it must be under the great seal post more  cro James Com dig a lease from the crown be not void but voidable only for  nonpayment of the rend accord to the reservation post   cro Elizabeth more  Plowd dougl if the king right to grant result from wardship and prerogative  queen whether the grant shall be under the great seal or that of the court of  ware queen whether if the king make a second presentation without mention or  revocation of the former it shall be void roll Abr dyer in marge cro James  bendl pl latch a case depend before the lordkeeper and agree upon by counsel  on both side and set down under their hand be that Mr Tate seize in fee of the  advowson of Wotton by his deed let that advowson and diverse other land for  year to Lord zouch and other for the payment of his debt and die seize of the  inheritance some of his land be hold by knightservice in capite and his son  and heir zouch Tate within age which be find by office the king grant the  wardship of body and land to the say lessee render rend to the receiver or his  deputy within forty day after the feast appoint for payment with a clause to  be void for nonpayment the rend due at Michaelmas James be arrear and in  February James the rend be pay to the receiver and all rend after duly pay the  church become void during the minority of the ware and afterward the king  present to this church under the great seal and under the seal of the court of  ware ut to put below a videlicet potter under the seal of the court of ware as  to a church which appertain to the king ration those inferior in rank lifetime  of the say ware who first obtain institution and induction and afterward  Stephens under the great seal who likewise obtain institution and induction  and which of these be parson be the question and first it be agree that the  king may present to any church which he have in right of wardship either under  the great seal or under the seal of the court of ware but a presentation under  the seal of the court of ware if he have not right to present in right of the  ware be void and can make a usurpation because the title to the presentation  be void and so no presentation and a institution without presentation be void  as it be hold in green case   b and James in the common plea croak car where  it be resolve accord that a presentation may be under any seal second it be  agree that the lease for year make of the land and advowson under the seal of  the court of ware be not absolute void by the nonpayment of the rend reserve  upon the say lease for year without office because the rend be Payable to the  receiver or his deputy which be matter of fact in pais for there be a  difference betwixt a lease for year reserve rend Payable at the receipt of the  exchequer with such provisos ut above and when it be Payable to the receiver  or his deputy for in the first case the payment or nonpayment appear by record  and therefore to prove the nonpayment there needs no office but in the last  case the payment be to be make to the receiver or his deputy and that appear  not of record and therefore the lease not void by the nonpayment without  office and so it be say be the resolution in the case of sir moil finch v  Throgmorton the three objection be admit the lease make of the wardship to be  void for a institute by Henry S c and abolish by car c with the tenure to  which wardship be a appendage croak car er p nonpayment of the rend without  office find yet because the king have but a three part of this advowson by the  wardship upon the statute of h n c against lease make for payment of debt and  have title to present to the other two part by his prerogative which ought to  be under the great seal for that shall have the preeminence to be prefer in  grant under which of these seal it ought to have be make the four objection be  that forasmuch as the presentation under the great seal and the presentation  under the seal of the court of ware be both the same day and the presentation  under the seal of the court of ware do not mention the first presentation and  revoke it whether it shall be good but to these two last point no opinion be  deliver because the lordkeeper conceive for the last reason that the  presentation under the seal of the court of ware be void and he establish the  possession with Stephens the presentee of the king under the great seal croak  car hilary term car in the common plea sir Thomas Richardson Knt chief justice  sir Richard Hutton Knt sir Francis Harvey Knt sir George croak Knt sir Henry  Yelverton Knt justice sir Robert heath Knt attorney general sir Richard  Sheldon Knt solicitor general