THE CASE OF REVOCATION OF USES. 281 



The question is, Whether Burrough-ash be well revoked ? 

 Which question divides itself into three points. 



First, whether the ita quod be a void and idle clause ? 

 for if so, then there needs no new assurance, but the revo 

 cation is absolute per se. 



The next is, if it be an effectual clause, whether it be 

 pursued or no ? wherein the question will rest, whether the 

 value of the reassured lands shall be only computed by 

 rents ? 



And the third is, if in other points it should be well pur 

 sued, yet whether the revocation can work until a sufficient 

 notice of the new assurance ? 



And I shall prove plainly, that ita quod stands well with 

 the power of revocation ; and if it should fall to the ground, 

 it draws all the rest of the clause with it, and makes the 

 whole void, and cannot be void alone by itself. 



I shall prove likewise that the value must needs be ac 

 counted not a tale value, or an arithmetical value by the 

 rent, but a true value in quantity and quality. 



And lastly, that a notice is of necessity, as this case is. 



I will not deny, but it is a great power of wit to make 

 clear things doubtful ; but it is the true use of wit to make 

 doubtful things clear, or at least to maintain things that 

 are clear to be clear, as they are. And in that kind I 

 conceive my labour will be in this case, which I hold to be 

 a case rather of novelty than difficulty, and therefore may 

 require argument, but will not endure much argument, but 

 to speak plainly to my understanding, asthe case hath no 

 equity in it, I might say piety, so it hath no great doubt 

 in law. 



First, therefore, this it is, that I affirm that the clause 

 so that, ita quod, containing the recompense, governs the 

 clause precedent of the power, and that it makes it wait 

 and expect otherwise than as by way of inception, but the 

 effect and operation is suspended, till that part also be per 

 formed ; and if otherwise, then I say plainly, you shall not 

 construe by fractions ; but the whole clause and power is 

 void, not in tanto, but in toto. Of the first of them I will 

 give four reasons. 



The first reason is, that the wisdom of the law useth to 

 transpose words according to the sense ; and not so much 

 to respect how the words do take place, but how the acts, 

 which are guided by those words, may take place, 



Hill and Graunger s case comment. 171. A man in Hill and 

 August makes a lease, rendering ten pounds rent yearly to Graunger s 



