Composition to present by turns. Where the of a copar or voidable. be said to be seised, the one of the one moiety to turn. A composition to present by turns may either be by record, or by deed, or by parol; as where privies in blood, as co-partners, or strangers in blood as tenants in common, or joint tenants agree by record to present by turns, this composition being by record is good, as it is if the composition be between privies or strangers, if the agreement is by deed. But a composition by parol can only be between privies, for strangers in blood can make no composition without deed. (1) The clerk of a coparcener being once compresentation plete incumbent, the turn is served, though he is cener is void, afterwards deprived. (2) Thus, where the institution is voidable by sentence declaratory, as from incapacity, or if the person presented is a layman, or the incumbent is deprived for heresy or any other crime, as the church is then full until the sentence is declared, the turn is gone. (') The Bishop of Salisbury v. Phillips, 1 Salk. R. 43. Carthew, 505 (2) Windsor's case, 5 Rep. 102. But if after presentation, institution, and induction the church remains actually void, as where the presentee does not read the articles or the like, there the turn is not served, but the presentor may present again without sentence of deprivation, the church never having been full, and the presentee being, as it were, an intruder; for were it otherwise, the statutes 13 Eliz. c. 12. 13. and 14 Car. II. c. 4. and the 23 Geo. II. c. 28. might be defrauded at the pleasure of the ordinary, if he would not deprive. (') by corpor When a corporation presents, it must be under Presentation their common seal, and by the true name of their ations. corporation. (2) Although there is a contrary judgment in the case of the dean and chapter of Norwich (3), who were incorporated by the name of the dean and chapter of the cathedral church of the Holy Trinity of Norwich, ex fundatione regis Edwardi Sexti, which words were omitted in a regrant to them by the same king, yet the grant was held good, but it was by reason of the statute of confirmation, made in the first year of that king's reign (+), which recites that he made several (*) Windsor v. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Loveday, &c. Cro. El. 687. Moore's R. 558. Baker v. Brent and Robinson, Cro. El. 679. (2) Ayray v. Sir R. Lovelas, (3) 3 Rep. 73. Mayor and Presentation gors. grants, &c. and for avoiding all controversies which might happen concerning any of them, for want of true naming any bodies corporate, it was enacted, that such grants made, or to be made, during his life, should be good, notwithstanding the misnaming. (') Where a person mortgages an advowson, by mortga- although the legal right to present is transferred to the mortgagee, yet he cannot present, even if the church becomes vacant, pending a suit by the mortgagee to foreclose. Thus, where a person having mortgaged a manor to which an advowson was appendant, to a plaintiff who brought a bill to foreclose, the court granted an injunction to stay proceedings in a suit brought by the mortgagee relative to the presentment, stating that as the mortgagee can make no profit by presenting to the church, nor account for any value in respect thereof to sink or lessen his debt, until foreclosure, he is but in the nature of a trustee for the mortgagor. (2) Hence, courts of equity, ever desirous of removing impediments and obstructions that arise in supporting trusts, will not only prevent trusts from doing mischief, and therefore decree () Vide The Attorney General v. The Mayor of Rye, 7 Taunt. R. 551. (2) Amhurst v. Dawling, 2 Vern. R. 401. a mortgagee's right of presenting to be set aside and not given in evidence in law ('), but also compel a mortgagee to present the nominee of a mortgagor, on his bringing the money into court or giving security to redeem. (2) A petition was presented on behalf of a mortgagor, that the mortgagee of a naked advowson might accept of his nominee, and present him upon an avoidance, the incumbent being dead. It was insisted for the mortgagee that, as there was a large arrear of interest, he ought to present, if any advantage accrued from it; and the case in Peer Williams was cited, where the plaintiff's father, being possessed of a ninety-nine years' term of the advowson of Eckington, made a mortgage thereof to the defendant, and in the mortgage deed was a covenant, that on every avoidance of the church the mortgagee should present; in which the court gave no opinion, but seemed to incline that the mortgagee had a right to present. Lord Hardwicke was of opinion that the mortgagor ought to nominate, and that it was not presumed any pecuniary advantage was made of a presentation. He observed that these were indifferent securities, but the mortgagee (') Attorney General v. Hesketh and others, 2 Vern. R. 549. Gardiner y. Griffith, 2 P. Wms. 404. (2) Gally v. Selby, Str. R. 403. Mackensie v. Robinson, 3 Atk. R. 559. Robinson v. Jago, Bunb. 130. Presentation by infants. should have considered it before he lent his money, and instead of bringing a bill of foreclosure, as he had done in this case, should have prayed a sale of the advowson. The next day he mentioned that he was not clear as to this point, and that he had looked into the case of Gardiner v. Griffiths, according to the state of it in the House of Lords, where the decree of Lord King was affirmed, and said, that was a mixed case, and that he doubted himself whether a covenant that the mortgagee should present, as was the case there, was not void, being a stipulation for something more than the principal and interest, and the mortgagee could not account for the presentation. The question was adjourned for further consideration to the next day of petitions, when the mortgagee, not being able to find any precedent in his favour, gave up the point of presenting, and an order was made that the mortgagor should be at liberty to present, and the mortgagee was obliged to accept of the mortgagor's nominee. (1) A guardian in socage cannot present to an advowson, because he can take nothing for it, and, consequently, cannot account for it; for, by the law, he can meddle with nothing that he (*) Mackensie v. Robinson, | 3 Atk. R. 559. Gardiner v. Griffith, 2 P. Wms. 404. |