case Whitfield against how see Osborne to Rowlett Ch d if a power be give to a  lessee for year and his assign to make lease for twentyone year or three life  and he assign the term the power go to the executor of the assignee and to the  assignee of the executor SC Jones SC vent SC skin ejectment the case be a be  seize in fee covenant to stand seize to the use of himself in tail and after  the determination of that estate to the use of he for forty year c reserve a  power by proviso that it shall and may be lawful to and for he and his  assignee of that term to make lease for twentyone year or three life a assign  the term the executor of the assignee assign over to I S the question be if I  S be the assignee of the executor of the assignee may make lease for twentyone  year by virtue of that power sander argue that he can take advantage of the  power reserve the power ought to be construe strict and shall only go to the  immediate assignee of a to run to the assignee of the executor of a assignee  be further than a assignment of commissioner of bankrupt can go dolben justice  that be a question and that also differ from our case here for they be not  assignee of the party but do come in in the post Jones justice this power be  not bind up to the person but be annex to the term and it be agree by Jones  dolben and Pemberton justice Scroggs chief justice absent that the assign of  the executor of the assignee have power to make lease and judgement be order  accord nisi c Mr sander however the next term argue it again and urge that at  commonlaw a covenant can not be assign over for default of shower KB privity  if a man devise a term to his executor and that he shall have power to make  lease and die and the executor prove the will and make another executor and  die the second executor be executor to the first testator and shall have the  benefit of the term yet he conceive it clear by the book that he shall not  have this power of make a it be say SC raym that this error be not allow but  that the judgement be reverse for want of a proper venire SC Jones SC vent it  seem however by the report SC post that the judgement be reverse for this  error in enter the judgement but sir b shower add yet quaere b mich term car  roll in the king bench e mich term car in the king bench shower KB er p lease  he also cite this case if a man have power to revoke by the consent of four  and one of they die that now the party can never revoke and he urge that the  case in question be much strong and shall these remote assignee have the power  then he that come to have the term upon a become facias or if he be outlaw and  the king shall grant over his term or keep it himself all these may make lease  pollexfen argue on the other side that Mr sander construction may hold true in  case of naked power but this be not so it be couple with a interest and annex  to the term and upon the account of it the term be more valuable sander then  urge another exception which be that he inter alian to send different ways the  five acre reddendo et solvend hence c now that alian may be somewhat out of  which a rend be not issuable or if it be rentable then the rend must be  apportion and so not the ancient accustom rend reserve for the five acre  accord to the power pollexfen as to this exception say that in one lease may  be several reddendums and when a man say that inter alian to send different  ways five acre reddend hence c the hence shall relate to the five acre only  Jones justice hold this the strong objection for that hence be the most common  and general word use in lease for all the thing demise but as to the other  they all continue of the same opinion Pemberton justice as to the hence  remember sander of the case where be manor land and a fair be let without a  rend reserve general and it be construe to arise out of the manor and land and  not out of the fair at all and afterward that exception be waive the counsel  refer the construction shower KB of the power to the court as the thing they  insist on and about the end of the term the court deliver their opinion again  that the assignee of the executor of the first assignee be within the benefit  of the proviso and have the power to make lease say withal that a devisee be a  assignee in law