beckets case r b seize of land in fee Elizabeth levy a fine c and declare the  use to be to himself for life and after to t b with power of revocation and to  limit new use and if he revoke and not declare then the use shall be to the  use of himself for life and after to Henry Becket with power in that indenture  also to revoke and limit new lane er p use and that then the fine shall be to  such new use and do other and after Elizabeth by a three indenture he revoke  the second indenture and declare the use of the fine to be to the use of  himself for life and after to Henry Becket in tail the remainder to I b c r b  die and t b his brother and heir be find a recusant and the land seize and  thereupon come h b and show the matter as above and upon that the king  attorney lane demurrer Bromley and Altham baron that the declaration of the  use make by the three indenture be good and he have power by the first to  declare new use may declare they with power of revocation for it be not mere a  power but conjoin with a interest and therefore may be execute with a power of  revocation and then when he by the three indenture revoke the former use now  it be as if new use have be declare and then he may declare use at any time  after the fine as it appear by mark dyer and coke lib Downhams case and in  this case they do rely upon Diggs case cook lib where it be say that upon such  a power he can revoke but once for that part unless he have a new power of  revocation of use new to be limit whereby it be employ that if he have a new  power to appoint new use be may revoke they also Snig baron to the contrary  and say that he have not power to declare several use by the first contract  which ought to authorize all the declaration upon that fine and then the  revocation by the three indenture be good and the limitation void and then it  shall be to the use of r b and his heir and so by the death of r b it noth  descend to t b the recusant and also he say that such a indenture to declare  use upon use be never make and it will be mischievous to declare infinite use  upon use Tanfield hold that the use in the second indenture stand unrevoked  and the new use in the three indenture be void and then b ought to have the  land again out of the king hand the power in the second indenture be that he  may revoke and limit new use and that the fine shall be to those new use and  no other and then if there be a revocation and no punctual limitation he have  not pursue his authority for be ought to revoke and limit and he can do the  one without the other also he say that after such revocation and limitation  the fine shall be to such new use and no other then if there be no new use  well limit in the three indenture the former use shall stand void notam it  seem that if a man make a feoff and declare use and reserve a power to revoke  they without say more he can revoke they and limit new for the use of the fine  be once declare by the indenture no other use can be aver or declare which be  not warrant thereby for he can declare the fine to be to new use when it be  once declare before cook lib that do other use can be aver then that in the  conveyance cook lib although that the first use be determine as if a man  declare the use of a fine to be to one and his heir upon condition that be  shall pay c or until be do such a act if the first use be determine the fine  can be otherwise declare to be to new use and therefore it seem that all the  use which shall rise out of the fine ought to spring from the first indenture  which testify the certain intention of the party in the leave thereof and then  in the case above the second indenture and the limitation of new use thereby  be well warrant by the first indenture and in respect that this be not a naked  power only I conceive that they may be upon condition or upon a power of  revocation to determine they but the power to limit the three use by a three  indenture after revocation of the second use in the second indenture have not  any warrant from the first indenture and without such warrant there care be no  declaration of such new use which be not declare or authorize by the first  indenture which note for it seem to be good law Hardres er p Hardres report  report of case adjudge in the court of exchequer in the year and and from  thence continue to the saint year of the reign of his late majesty king  Charles the whole take and collect by sir thomas HARDRES Knt late of GraysInn  and sergeant at law to his say majesty king Charles the second the second  edition Hardres de term saint trin year domini in SCACCARIO