284 THE CASE OF REVOCATION OF USES. 



you will say are forms and circumstances annexed to the 

 conveyance required : why surely any collateral matter 

 coupled by the ita quod is as strong ? If the ita quod had 

 been, that Sir John Stanhope within six months should 

 have paid my lady one thousand pounds, or entered into 

 bond never more to disturb her, or the like, all these make 

 but one entire idea or notion, how that his power should 

 not be categorical, or simple at pleasure, but hypothetical, 

 and qualified, and restrained, that is to say, not the one 

 without the other, and they are parts incorporated into the 

 nature and essence of the authority itself. 



The third reason is, the justice of the law in taking words 

 so, as no material part of the parties intent perish ; for, as 

 one saith, pra stat torque re verba quam homines, better wrest 

 words out of place than my Lady Stanhope out of her 

 jointure, that was meant to her. And therefore it is elegantly 

 said in Fitzwilliams s case, which I vouched before, though 

 words be contradictory, and, to use the phrase of the book, 

 pugnant tanquam ex diametro ; yet the law delighteth to 

 make atonement, as well between words as between parties, 

 and will reconcile them so as they may stand, and abhor- 

 reth a vacuum, as well as nature abhorreth it ; and as nature, 

 to avoid a vacuum, will draw substances contrary to their 

 propriety, so will the law draw words. Therefore, saith 

 Littleton, if I make a feoffment reddendo rent to a stranger, 

 this is a condition to the fcotfbr, rather than it shall be void, 

 which is quite cross; it sounds a rent, it works a condition, 

 it is limited to a third person, it inuretli to the feofibr; 

 and yet the law favoureth not conditions, but to avoid a 

 vacuum. 



45 E. 3. So in the case of 45 E. III. a man gives land in frank- 

 marriage, the remainder in fee. The frank-marriage is first 

 put, and that can be but by tenure of the donor ; yet rather 

 than the remainder should be void, though it be last placed, 

 the frank-marriage, being but a privilege of estate, shall be 

 destroyed. 



So 33 H. VI. Tressham s case ; the king granteth a ward 

 ship, before it fall; good, because it cannot inure by cove 

 nant, and if it should not be good by plea, as the book terms 

 it, it were void ; so that, no, not in the king s case, the law 

 will not admit words to be void. 



So then the intent appears most plainly, that this act of 

 Sir John should be act us geminus, a kind of twine to take 

 back, and to give back, and to make an exchange, and not 

 a resumption ; and therefore upon a conceit of repugnancy, 



