case mariot against smith if a letter of attorney recite a feoff of that  Septemher where it be that Septemher and give authority to make or take livery  secundum form el execution chartce prcedicice and livery he make upon it it  will he void   light roll Abr roll Rep Leon Bac Abr wood con salk Cowp livery  by attorney Ejectionefirmce upon a special verdict it be find that one l be  seize of the land and make thereof a charter of feoff to the lessor and his  heir date the ten of September and he by another deed recite that l have make  unto bill a charter of feoff of that land date the eleven of September give  thereby authority to a to receive livery and seize for he secundumformam el  execution charice praedictce a receive livery UPOD the feoff accord and it be  find that there be not any other warrant of attorney and whether this be a  good feoff or not be the question draw move that it be for all be certain  videlicet the name of the feoff and feoff and the certainty of the land and  nothing mistake but the date which be sufficient certain before it be not  material although it be mistake as in Edward fol ultimo and dyer Coltons case  but all the justice resolve to the contrary for the warrant to receive livery  be by letter of attorney which authorize he to receive it secundum form chark  date the eleven of Septemher whereas there be not any such and so he have not  any warrant to receive it wherefore the livery make be void and the date of  the deed be the principal note to know it and if it vary in the date there be  not any such deed and where a statute be plead and misrecited in the date as  in Plowden strange case there be not any such statute and it be not like to  Coltons case for there although the house be misname in who tenure c yet it be  certain enough before and pass by the charter of feoff and the letter of  attorney refer thereto and so they all hold if the warrant have be to make  livery it have be ill but it be then move that in regard that the feoff  himself make the livery to we attorney it shall he a good livery as to he  although it shall not he to the feoff croak Elizabeth but Anderson and  Walmsley deny it for there be not any intent to feoff the attorney but the  feoff wherefore it be utter void and it be adjudge for the defendant croak  Elizabeth er p