case wright against Hobert see goodman v mayor of salt App Cas in re  Christchurch enclosure Act Ch d a grant of land to charitable use videlicet  that as many of the inhabitant of the parish of a as be able to buy three cow  may feed they on the land from may to August extend to every inhabitant who  have three cow S c duke upon a appeal from a decree of commissioner of  charitable use a see Elizabeth c Geo c a the case be a certain piece of land  call the lizard in the parish of Wimmerton contain about forty acre of pasture  be former the inheritance of two person who several hundred year pass convey  the same to trustee and their heir to the use of themselves and the survivor  of they for life and after their decease to the intent that as many of the  inhabitant of that village as be able to buy three cow may put they there to  grass in the daytime from the first Monday in may to the first day of August  for ever and from that day to be in common for all the inhabitant modern  report there until ladyday follow and then to be enclose for raise the grass  until the first Monday in may for ever but this grant not appear before the  commissioner it be pretend that the modern report er p land be give to the  poor of that parish and that about one hundred year pass the town and the  church where this grant be keep be burn and so the evidence that it be give to  the poor be destroy by fire b see askew v the poulterer company vezey  Clavering v Clavering vezey b whereupon the commissioner decree that sir John  Hobert who be lord of the manor shall make a feoff of these land to the use of  himself and other and their heir in trust to put out some of the poor boy of  that parish every year to some trade from which decree the plaintiff appeal c  Burford v Lenthall atk c and object against it that there be no proof before  the commissioner that this land be give to the use of the poor of that parish  so that they have no power to make such a decree and now upon produce the  original grant before the commissioner which be not burn as it be suggest it  appear to be as above mention by which no manner of difference be make by the  grantors between the rich and the poor inhabitant d see duke on charitable use  d of that village the court be not satisfy why this original grant be not  produce before the commissioner but see no colour to judge that these land be  give to the use of the poor for that by the grant itself the contrary appear  and it be prove that the usage have be accord to the grant for sixty year pass  therefore there be no proof that this be give to the poor exclusive of the  rest of the inhabitant the commissioner have no authority to make such a  decree for which reason it ought to be reverse and it be decree that every  inhabitant who have three cow shall put they to grass on these land c as in  the original grant c that if this manner of graze have be by prescription or  usage no person but the inhabitant of ancient message can be entitle to it but  it be otherwise appoint by the grant a Baylis v attorneygeneral atk  attorneygeneral v Middleton vezey Com dig use n a of the donor and that there  be no colour of cost b aylet v Dodd atk Burford v Lenthall atk Jones v Coxeter  atk b against the commissioner who contest nothing in their own right not but  that the court will have punish they if it have appear they intend to oppress