288 THE CASE OF REVOCATION OF USES. 



value of a present arrentation, or to understand it of a just 

 and true value. 



The word value is a word well known to the law, and 

 therefore cannot be, except it be willingly, misunderstood. 

 By the common law there is upon a warranty a recovery in 

 value. I put the case therefore that I make a feoffrnent in 

 fee with warranty of the manor of Dale, being worth twenty 

 pounds per annum, and then in lease for twenty shillings. 

 The lease expires, for that is our case, though I hold it not 

 needful, the question is, whether, upon an eviction, there 

 shall not be recovered from me land to the value of twenty 

 pounds. 



So if a man give land in frank-marriage then rented at 

 forty pounds and no more worth, there descendeth other 

 lands, let perhaps for a year or two for twenty pounds, but 

 worth eighty pounds, shall not the donee be at liberty to 

 put this land in hotchpotch ? 



So if two parceners be in tail, and they make partition of 

 lands equal in rent, but far unequal in value, shall this bind 

 their issues ? By no means; for there is no calendar so false 

 to judge of values as the rent, being sometimes improved, 

 sometimes ancient, sometimes where great fines have been 

 taken, sometimes where no fines ; so as in point of recom 

 pense you were as good put false weights into the hands of 

 the law, as to bring in this interpretation of value by a pre 

 sent arrentation. But this is not worth the speaking to in 

 general ; that which giveth colour is the special words in 

 the clause of revocation, that the twenty pounds value 

 should be according to the rents then answered ; and there 

 fore that there should be a correspondence in the computa 

 tion likewise of the recompense. But this is so far from 

 countenancing that exposition, as, well noted, it crosseth it; 

 for opposita juxta se posita magis elucescunt : first, it may 

 be the intent of Sir Thomas, in the first clause, was double, 

 partly to exclude any land in demesne, partly knowing the 

 land was double, and as some say quadruple, better than 

 the rent, he would have the more scope of revocation under 

 his twenty pounds value. 



But what is this to the clause of recompense ? first, are 

 there any words secundum compiitationem pr&dictam ? There 

 are none. Secondly, doth the clause rest upon the words 

 similis valoris? No, but joineth tantum et similis valoris: 

 confound not predicaments ; for they are the mere-stones 

 of reason. Here is both quantity and quality ; nay he saith 

 farther, within the same towns. Why, marry, it is some- 



