coke b thomas holt case mich James in the court of ware grandfather father and  son the grandfather seize in fee of land hold by knight service in capite of  the king and of other land hold of other convey part of his land hold and part  of his land not hold to the use of the father and his wife for their life  remainder to the use of the son in tail male with remainder over in tail  remainder to himself for life with other remainder in tail reversion in fee to  his own right heir and other land hold c to the use of himself for life with  several remainder to his young son then live for their life several remainder  to the father for life remainder to himself in tail male with other remainder  the reversion in fee to himself and his heir the grandfather die the father be  of full age who tender his livery and die before livery sue the son continue  the livery hold by the death of the father before livery sue the king have  lose his primer seize after the death of the grandfather the son shall not sue  livery nor pay primer seize if the king have once primer seize which be  effectual he shall not have it again for land convey to the young son the king  shall not have primer seize in respect of the dry reversion descend to the son  Francis holt the grandfather have issue Thomas holt the father his old son and  four other son Thomas have issue Francis Francis the grandfather be seize of  diverse land in fee of the county of Lancaster part of which be hold of the  king by knight service in capite and the rest hold of other convey part of his  land hold and of the other land not hold to the use of Thomas holt the father  and constancy his wife yet live for their life and afterward to the use of  Francis the son and to the heir male of his body with diverse remainder over  in tail the remainder to Francis the grandfather for life with other remainder  in tail the reversion in fee to the right heir of Francis the grandfather and  convey other land hold c to the use of himself for life with several remainder  to other of his young son then live for their life several the remainder to  Thomas the father for his life the remainder to Francis the grandfather and to  the heir male of his body with diverse other remainder the reversion in fee to  Francis the grandfather and his heir Francis holt the grandfather die Thomas  the father be of full age who tender his livery and die before livery sue or  office find Francis the son be of full age and all this be find by office  Francis the son continue the livery constancy the wife of Thomas the father  and the four young son of Francis be yet live and two question be move in this  case if the king shall a   a   b a b Inst b   a light Rep Inst coke report a  er p have any primer seize in this case in possession if he shall have any  primer seize for the reversion in fee expectant upon the say estate tail which  descend after the death of the say Thomas the father coke a and in this case  these point the case be often debate and good consideration bad be resolve as  to the first point be resolve that by the death of Thomas before livery sue  the king have lose have any primer seize after the death of Francis the  grandfather as in before in a Northcots case and in b hale case in the eight  part of my report and oftentimes it have be resolve and there be a difference  betwixt livery or primer seize and mean rate for livery or primer seize be  lose by the death of the heir but mean rate if any be due not for they be  absolute vest in the king that Francis the son shall not sue livery or pay any  primer seize because he be out of the stat of h h as also it have be  oftentimes resolve because after the death of the grandfather primer seize be  due by the father and the son live the father be not within the stat that  where the statute of h give the king primer seize in case of act execute that  if the king have a primer seize the stat be c satisfy and he shall not have of  other in remainder or of the young son c as the common experience be in the  court of ware then it be strong urge that in this case forasmuch as a right  and interest of primer seize be vest in the king although afterward by the act  of God by the death of Thomas the primer seize by act in law be discharge yet  forasmuch as the king shall have but one primer seize that for the land convey  to the young son the king shall not have any primer seize but it shall be  account the laches of the king officer that they do not force Thomas to sue  livery or have take security of he to answer it but I be resolve that the king  shall have primer seize for the land convey to the young son in this case  because they be within one of the three case in which wardship and primer  seize be give to the king by the say act S advancement of his wife preferment  of his child and payment of his debt and the reason and cause of this  resolution be that when the say act give the king primer seize it be intend of  a actual and effectual primer seize and not of any which be mathematical and  imaginary for the king ought always to have the full and completeeffect of the  thing which be due to he and therefore if one who be within the say three case  die before livery so that the king have lose his primer seize and have not the  effect of the statute the king shall have primer seize of other who be within  one of the say three case but not of any other who be out of the say three  case and this resolution be well prove by former resolution and authority in  the like case and therefore if the king have title to present by lapse here  vice and be present and his clerk be admit and institute and die before  induction the a king shall present again for he have not the full and complete  effect of his presentation as it be resolve by sir James Dyerettotam curian in  Giles case Elizabeth in common banc so if the king marry a daughter who he  have in b ware infra aged nubile and before the age of consent the husband die  the king shall have the marriage of the heir again because the first marriage  be coke b not complete as it be resolve in ambrosia gorge case in the six part  of my report f b and yet in these case a common person shall be bar in c e a b  the case be such king h grant the honour of S Wolrey with the advowson of  Mixby thereto appendant Richard Com Cornubd ring Almannorum and to the heir of  his body save the reversion to the king which earl have issue Edmund his son  and die Edmund his son octab Purific and e levy a fine of one acre of land  parcel of the say honour with the advowson of the say church of Mixby to the  bishop of Rochester c which alienation be before the statute de gift  conditional make year e and afterward the say Edmund earl of Cornwall die  without issue and by the authority of that book it a Ant b b   b c   b   light  a   a light Rep a Cr James roll light Rep die pl b   light b light Rep   b  more lie guard c c   light a b oh b coke report a er p appear that although  the alienation be make before the statute and post offspring encourage the  donee and their issue to have power to make strange to bar the reversion of  common person yet it shall not bar the king reversion although it be with  collateral warranty if there be not asset descend so that the king may have a  full satisfaction and recompense for without warranty and recompense it be not  such complete alienation because it move from he who have not a complete  estate which shall bar the king of his reversion and therewith agree d ass p  and yet in the case of a common person such bare alienation before the statute  without any warranty or collateral warrant without any alienation will bar the  donor in such case as to it be resolve and so be it affirm by the attorney of  the court of ware that the usage have always be in such case that Francis be  of full age at the death of Thomas the father the king shall not have primer  seisinof the say seck and fruitless reversion in the case at bar and the  reason be because the word of Prrogativa king c be e king to have chiefs  seisinam c to take in hand exitus the same the earth et tene mentor while c so  when no rend or profit be reserve the king can take exitus c in such case but  if the king tenant by knight service in capite make a gift in tail render a  yearly rend or other profit to he and his heir and die his heir of full age  there the king may take primer seize of the rend or profit which descend to  the heir for one year and so notam for such a seck and fruitless reversion the  heir shall be in ware if he be within age but shall not pay primer seize for  such fruitless reversion if he be of full age at the time of the death of the  ancestor