case Brownlow against far Trinity term Elizabeth roll line in what manner  patent grant by the crown shall he expound trespass for the take of two load  of wheat set out for the nine part of the grain in Hepworth upon not guilty  plead it be demurrer upon the evidence the case be that king Edward the six be  seize in fee of the nine sheaf of the corn and grain in Epworth alias Hepworth  as parcel of the possession of the abbey of saint Leonard in the county of  York and by letter patent under the great seal in Edward grant to Estofe and  Downman and to their heir ltotam that medielatem nonce garboo blador el a  grain vocal the nine sheaf de et in Epwortk in comitat Eborum modus well  recently in tenurd si e harrow patione willielm ware ac recently monastery  saint Leonard in county Eborum dissolute speclant and under this patent the  plaintiff claim the entire Dinth sheaf for in truth all be in the tenure of  ware by a lease make Henry under rend but Epworth be not in the county of York  but in the county of Lincoln and whether upon the patent the entire nine sheaf  pass or not be the question by reason of the statute of misrecital make Edward  c a it be argue by roper for the plaintiff that all pass for the quantity be  mistake it be express aid by the letter of the statute and if not yet by the  intent of the statute but Henry Yelverton contra as to the misprision of the  county where Epworth lie it be agree on both side not to he material for that  be help by the statute and so hold the justice Popham and Clench eceteris  Justiliariis send away as to the principal matter Popham say that the patent  can not convey more than the moiety if it can convey that for when the king be  deceive in his grant b it be not the intention of the maker of the statute to  help that grant as if the king grant the moiety of two acre it be not reason  that the patent shall he construe that he shall have two acre and that be the  difference as to the quantity where the certainty be plain as where the king  grant two acre call the manor of d whereas the manor contain a hundred acre it  be a good grant of the whole manor and of all the acre but if he have grant  all his manor of d contain ten acre whereas it contain twenty acre nothing  have pass by the commonlaw but it be aid by the statute there be also a a  expire see r iffheads stat b Henry pl bro patent   croak Elizabeth er p  difference as to the quality and nature of the thing as where king Henry the  eight grant to sir Thomas more tolan turbariam croak Elizabeth svan in d where  a former patentee have such a grant have before convert part thereof into  arable land and part into pasture that sir Thomas more shall have but that  only which be then turbary and the statute do not remedy such a grant for  turbary S a profit parnable which may he in one place and not in another after  conversion but if it be a great more and after such conversion of part into  arable or pasture the king have grant tolan custom svan it have be otherwise  for that be provide for by the say statute and if he have grant all his  estovers in such a wood whereas he have not any estovers but a coppice in the  say wood he be not remedy by this statute and if a common person have grant a  acre call the two acre one acre only have pass et strong in the king case  wherefore it be adjudge for the plaintiff with the assent of Clench cceteris  Juslitiariis send away