case smith against wheeler easter term car roll see small v Marwood b c  Siggers vevans Elizabeth Bl Standinq v Bouting Ch d London and county Banking  company v London and river plate bank Q b d Mallott v Wilson Ch a be possess  of a term for eighty year convey the whole term in part of the premise  absolute and the residue in trust for himself for life with remainder over  provide that if he have issue the trust shall cease and the assignment be in  trust for such issue with a power of revoke the say trust by his will in write  this trust estate be notfraudulent notforfeited after the death of a for high  treason commit by he during his lifetime S C post S C free S C vent S C lev    lane hard and S C keb roll Abr roll Abr march side raym Bac Abr Bac Abr hawk p  c Mod ambler a writ of error be bring to reverse a judgement in the common  plea upon a special verdict in a ejectment the jury find that one Simon main  be possess of a rectory for a long term and have convey the whole term in part  of it to certain person absolute he convey his term in the residue be two part  in this manner scilicet in trust for himself during life and afterward in  trust for the payment of the rend reserve upon the original lease and for  several of his friend c provide that if he shall have any issue of his body at  the time of his death then the trust to cease and the assignment to be in  trust for such issue c and there be another proviso that if he be mind to  change the use or otherwise to dispose of the premise that he shall have power  so to do by write in the presence of two or more witness or by his last will  and testament they further find that he have issue male at the time of his  death but make no disposition pursuant to his power and that in his lifetime  he have commit treason and they find the act of his attainder the question be  whether the rest of the term that remain unexpired at the time of his death be  forfeit to the king the point make be two first whether the deed be fraudulent  second whether the whole term be not forfeit by reason of the trust or power  of revocation Pemberton argue that the deed be fraudulent because he take the  profit during his life and the assignee know not of the deed of trust the  court have in these case adjudge fraud upon circumstance appear upon record  without any verdict the case that come near to this be king v modern earl  Nottingham and other in lane second he argue that there be a trust by express  word and if there be a trust then not only the trust but the estate be vest in  the king by the express word of the statute of Henry c the king indeed can  have no large estate in the land than the person attaint have in the trust and  if this conveyance be in trust for Simon main only during his life the king  can have the land no long but be conceive it be a trust for Simon main during  the whole term a trust he say be a right to receive the profit of the land and  to dispose of the land in equity now if Simon main have a right to receive the  profit and a present power to dispose of the land he take it to be a trust for  he and that consequent by his attainder it be forfeit to the king Coleman  contra as for the matter of fraud first there be no fraud find by the jury and  for you to judge of fraud upon circumstance be against the chancellor of  Oxford case   as for the trust it must be agree that if there be any either  trust or condition by construction upon these proviso in Simon main in his  life between Michaelmas and the time of make the Act the trust will be vest in  the king but whether will it be vest in the king as a trust or as a estate for  I be inform that it have be adjudge between the king v holland a style Rep  roll alein a modern er p that if a alien purchase copyholdlands the king shall  not have the estate but as a trust and the particular reason be because the  king shall not be tenant to the lord of the manor Kelynge chief justice the  Act of parliament take the estate out of the trustee and put it in the king  Coleman but I say here be no trust forfeitable by the body of the deed all be  out of he if a man make a feoff in fee to the use of his will because he have  not put it out of he there arise a use and a trust for himself but in our case  he have put the use out of himself for there be several use declare but there  be a further difference if Simon main have declare the use to other absolute  and have reserve liberty to himself to have alter it by his will that may have  alter the case but here the proviso be that if at the time of his death he  shall have a son c so that it be reduce to he upon a condition and contingency  as to the power of revocation he cite the duke of Norfolk case b Eq Abr Chan  case pollexfen Chan Rep b in Englefields case c   Leon c which Twisden say  come strong to this Adjournalur d this case be argue a second time at the bar  in Hilary term car and in easter term car the judgement be affirm Fidepost d