a information against sir edward Dimock the case of the information against  sir Edward Dimock which be the last term be now argue again by Thomas crew for  the king but his argument I have not write Walter for the defendant say that  the commission for take of the acknowledgement of the lease be not return in  the life of the queen nor the case be not put in this case in the queen life  time as it be in diverse of the case cite of the other side and therefore it  differ from they in this case he observe four point first if this lease shall  be good if it be never enrol second admit that it can if here be such a  enrolment as be requisite three admit that the lease be good without enrolment  or with this enrolment then if this can avoid the lease make in the interim  fourthly if no lease be good until enrolment then if the confirmation be make  before the enrolment can be a good confirmation and as to the first he  conceive that the case put of personal chattel vest in the king without record  be good law but here it be of a real chattel and he say that there be three  reason to prove that personal chattel be in the king without record first they  be in judgement of law trivial second they be perish and of no continuance  three the record will be infinite if they shall be of record but there be no  such reason to prove that real chattel shall not be of record for in the  judgement of law they be of great value and be also more permanent and  therefore thrope say in the e that it have be adjudge that livery ought to be  make upon a lease for year also lessee for year shall have aid but lessee at  will shall not also it appear by cook lib in sir Andrew Corbets case that a  guardian shall not avoid a lease for year also the statute regard lease for  year and it be hold in Gravenors case in the Elizabeth in the court of ware  that a woman shall forfeit her jointure for make of a lease for year by  acceptance of a fine and reservation of a rend also lessee for year lane may  falsify a recovery also it be agree of the other part that the king can take a  use without record and e dyer Bourchers case the king can take a use without  record also he say that in every case where a deed or record be requisite for  a freehold the same conveyance be also requisite for a lease for year and  therefore if a freehold be convey to a body politic it ought to be by deed the  same law if a lease for year be convey to they and so if a lease for year be  make of a hundred or rend this ought to be by deed by h foe also in baize and  Norwoods case Elizabeth it be adjudge that a lease for year can be make to a  corporation without deed e brook title recognizance a man can make a surrender  to the king without record the second point he say that the enrolment be make  after the death of the bishop lessor or of the queen lessee be no sufficient  matter of record for in judgement of law nothing shall pass out of the lessor  until the enrolment and there lane er p before the enrolment be the thing  which make the estate and not only which perfect it and in all case as appear  in say and full case the thing which make the estate or which perfect it ought  to be in the life of the lessor and therefore if a reversion be grant  attornament ought to be make in the life of the grantor assize plan assize  plan and cook lib in tookers case and to prove further that the thing which  ought to perfect the estate ought to be in the life of the grantor or feoff he  vouch t e title Abbe and e and temps h title feoff if a feoff enter not by  force of a livery within the view this be not good and if a bishop make a  lease and the chapter do not confirm it until after his death it be not good  by e title Abbe also here to prove that in respect of the queen lessee die  before enrolment that the lease be not good for this purpose he vouch e and  the two e and the h and e that chattel grant to the king shall go to the  successor and not to the executor and because nothing vest in the queen  nothing can vest in the king as successor for a thing can be vest in one as  heir or successor which be never vest in the ancestor and be vouch bullock  case in Elizabeth dyer Edward of election also it can vest in the king primary  because he be never party to the indenture of lease and he cite a case to be  adjudge accord betwixt find and Elizabeth two h that he who be not party to  the indenture shall not be primary bind nor shall primary take by the same  indenture and it be inconvenient that this shall be a good enrolment and where  it be say of the other part that a bargain and sale be good enough although it  be not enrol in the life of the party so that it be enrol within month to that  he well agree for by the bargain and sale a use passes at the commonlaw  without help of the statute and this without enrolment and the statute of  enrolments restrain it not but there it may pass well enough at this day and  so the statute perfect it so that it be within month indifferent and therefore  it be good notwithstanding the death of the party and he conclude with the  book of the Elizabeth dyer fol and whereas it be say to be resolve contrary in  a authority not print he say that he believe the print book and vouch also the  case cite before in butler and baker case cook lib to the three point it seem  to he that although the enrolment be good yet that shall not avoid the estate  by relation for a relation be not good to avoid mean conveyance without a  ancient right as if the king villain purchase land the king now have right and  therefore a office find after shall relate to avoid all mean conveyance and he  say that relation be not so certain wherefore a man may make a ground for  every case have his particular reason and therefore to some purpose a  attornament ought to relate but to other purpose it ought not to relate and  therefore a attornament can relate to entitle a grantee to rend due between  the grant and the attornament and so in this case if the enrolment have be in  the life of the bishop and of the queen that et it can not have give to her  the mean lane profit between the grant and the enrolment and he vouch a case  in butler and baker case and the h that a relation shall never be prejudicial  to a stranger for his estate lawful execute and therefore if a feoff be make  to a husband and wife and to a three person and after the husband and wife be  divorce for a precontract yet they shall take but a moiety as if they be marry  also it be a rule that a estate vest can be make tortuous by relation see  butler and baker case and he vouch a case to be adjudge betwixt Windgate and  hall in the king bench mich Elizabeth that if a statute be acknowledge to a  common person and another statute to the king by the same conusor and after  the statute acknowledge to the common person be extend and the conusee in  possession and also the king sue execution of his statute he shall not avoid  the estate lawful execute in the first conusee as it be there hold but the  baron say One voice that if such a case shall come in question before they  they will hold the contrary for the king a for the four point videlicet if the  confirmation be good be make before enrolment of the lease and so upon the  matter before any lease in be to which the counsel of the one part nor of the  other be provide to speak Walter say that the confirmation be not good for  Littleton say that a thing or estate which be not in be can be confirm and  Tanfield chief baron say and other also that this be the principal point of  the case and the great doubt be of the other part videlicet that this be not  good and therefore advice they to argue it at another day and Walter say that  the confirmation be not good in regard it be not of record nor enrol and he  vouch the of e foe that the king can take notice of anything without record  the lane er p next term upon the first Tuesday it be appoint to be argue again  and Doddridge the king sergeant observe four point first if any enrolment be  necessary in the case second admit that the enrolment be requisite if here be  a good enrolment be make after the king death three if the confirmation of the  dean and chapter be of necessity to be enrol fourthly admit that the  confirmation need not to be enrol and that the lease ought to be enrol then if  this confirmation be good because it be before the enrolment of the lease as  to the first he conceive that aswell a chattel real as a thing personal may  vest in the king without record for it shall be inconvenient that chattel  shall be enrol first for the infiniteness second for the small value of they  in the judgement of law and he vouch assize plan of a legacy devise to the  king and h foe if a chattel be give to the king there need no record and the e  foe the king bring a quare hinder upon a grant of the next presentation  without record and yet it be good h foe a obligation may be grant to the king  without record b brook prerogative and h the baily shall have aid of the king  and he vouch also e brook prerogative and h foe Fitzherbert Villinage and  brook prerogative and the h foe if a man possess of a term be outlaw this term  be in the king by outlawry without record to the second point be think that  the enrolment be good after the queen death for the enrolment ought to relate  as it appear by I h foe and this relation disaffirm the mean estate and give  also the mean profit and as to the point of relation he vouch Nichols case  Plowden where the entry of the heir once lawful be make unlawful by relation  and he vouch also r foe in the end of Wheelers case and by the h foe a man  seize of land be attaint of treason the king grant this land to a the person  attaint commit a trespass and be restore by parliament the patentee shall  never have a action of trespass because this restitution take away the cause  of action and to prove that the enrolment may be well enough after the queen  death he say that the say case put to be resolve in the that of Elizabeth dyer  foe concern the duke of Somerset be after adjudge contrary to the say  resolution and he say that the case concern parcel of the land contain in lane  S the deed come in question in parliament in the Elizabeth and it be then  command that the deed shall be enrol and also he compare it to a case put in  Shelleys case that the heir shall have land as by dissent from his father  although that the conveyance be not enrol in the life of the father also he  say that the queen die not as to her body politic to the three point he say  that the confirmation need not to be enrol for it passes nothing and be but a  bare assent and therefore differ from the case of patron and ordinary and of a  disseizsee for the disseizsee have right to grant and the patron and ordinary  have interest in r but bishop be seize in their own right and therefore their  lease want the approbation only of the dean and chapter and he vouch cook lib  the dean and chapter of Norwiches case and the writ of without assent little  head in the register prove it for the title confirmation pl observe and  Littleton in the end of his chap of discontinuance say that a parson may  charge the gleab by the assent of the patron and ordinary and the opinion of  brook in the case of the of h title confirmation pl agree to this opinion and  so be some opinion in the h foe alid be say that this point be adjudge accord  in the first of man but he have not the record thereof and therefore he will  not insist upon it and he vouch I and of man dyer foe and cook lib foe Hodges  case that the acceptance of the patron be good enough to make a confirmation  to the four point be say that the confirmation be good notwithstanding it be  before the enrolment of the lease for the lease shall stay his operation until  all the ceremony be use for the perfection of the estate and he vouch  Littleton foe and e dyer foe where a parson make a lease to commence after his  death the patron and ordinary in the life of the parson confirm it and this be  good and he vouch also whether Maiowes case cook lib where the father confirm  the son grant when he have but a possibility and yet good and he vouch dyer  Elizabeth foe where a grant be incertain and the inception be before the  confirmation after make it good and therefore he say if seize and disseizee  bargain land although it be but a confirmation of the disseizee which may be  well enough without enrolment of the deed by a bare delivery yet this shall  hinder the operation until the enrolment of the deed which shall pass the  estate from the seize and by cook lib Fitzherbert case it appear that one part  of the assurance shall stay his operation lane er p until another part have  his perfection and therefore he conclude that here the confirmation in  judgement of law shall stay his operation until the lease be enrol which pass  the estate see the argument of sergeant Nichols to the contrary and also the  argument of Thomas crew in easter term and Trin James