case the queen against vaughan Hilary term Elizabeth roll what shall he  construe a concealment substraction or detainer of land so as to avoid the  king patent SC more   a I term Rep information of intrusion against Vaughan  upon not guilty plead a special verdict be find that the prior of kingslangley  in the county of Hertford year Henry surrender the scite of his priory and all  his land c to the king by deed enrol afterward in Heil the king grant the  scite of the monastery to the suffragan of Dover for his life who in Henry die  and that scite come to the queen that now S afterward in the eight year of her  reign a commission issue to inquire in what estate and reparation that house  be and thereby it be find to he ruinous and the Lord treasurer and other by  commission sell the stone and lead of the house afterward year Elizabeth the  queen grant the scite of the say priory to Grimstone with a proviso that if  the say land or tenement or profit thereof be not conceal substract or unjust  detain from the queen her father brother or sister before the of Elizabeth  that the patent shall he void and they further find that the queen be not  answer any rend or profit thereof heside the say stone and lead before the of  Elizabeth el si c upon this matter coke the queen attorney pray judgement for  the queen for there be not any land convey by that patent but that which be  conceal from the crown but the priory and that scite now in question can be  conceal for it be by the prior surrender express mention and so reveal to the  king by the king grant also it be reveal be therein mention by express word  then if once it he reveal by express word at the time of his title accrue it  can never he conceal as long as the crown have not another title thereto but  if it he afterward divest from the crown by the king grant in fee and  afterward come again to the crown by attainder of felony because it be by a  new title it may be conceal and that be in common experience and the land  itself shall never he say to he conceal or unjust detain and therefore it be  adjudge in pasch Elizabeth betwixt smith and Petoe that where king Henry the  four grant land parcel of the crown by his letter patent under the duchy seal  which be croak Elizabeth void and the queen who now be grant those land with a  proviso that if the land be not conceal that then c it be rule that this land  shall not pass for land can be conceal and therefore out of that proviso and  so it be resolve in one shaftos case of Ireland wherefore c after diverse  argument on each side the court resolve for the queen for they all agree that  it can be conceal after it once he reveal by any special word in any record  unless that land be absolute croak Elizabeth er p give from the crown and  afterward come unto it by a new title and a concealment be only where land be  in the queen by attainder or other title and there be not any record to inform  her what land they be but here the record of the surrender be of the scite and  all the other land c for the scite be express that it be in the king but for  the other land they be in the generality and may he well conceal for there be  not any record to show what they be so where there be any office to entitle  the queen after a attainder or any survey those land which be particular  mention in the office or survey can afterward he say to he conceal for they he  reveal to the queen by those record but if any land he omit out of that survey  it may well be say to be conceal Popham say that all this be agree in the case  of London and sir Christopher Hatton so it pass not within the proviso of the  concealment for patent be to he construe secundum thought king and not in  deception and here it be not intend to pass any land but that which be conceal  and first reveal by Grimstone which be not here for the reason beforementioned  the great question then be whether this be within the clause of the land and  profit ind injust detent c c and it be hold by Popham and gawdy that it be not  for Popham say that nothing shall be term to be injust detent from the queen  but that whereof the queen have but a right only and never have any possession  and these word be insert into patent by reason of a judgement in the exchequer  where a abbot be seize of certain land and afterward the abbey and all the  possession be give to king Henry the eight the queen grant this land whereof  the abbot as seize by express word with such a proviso that if they be not  conceal that then c and adjudge that they pass not for the king never have any  title but a right only to that land and therefore the land be unjust detain  and therefore from that time it have be use to have these word v Elizabeth  njust detent c but when the Kjng have possession thereof as he have here by  the death of the suffragan who be tenant for life it can be say a detainer  from her for she may have have a account against any who take the profit of  those land which prove that she always be in possession of they and here this  land be waste land whereof no profit be answer to the queen it can be say to  be a unjustdetainineiA from her wherefore upon these reason it be adjudge for  the queen vide