of his last Will how the Estate stands in the Surrenderer Copy-holder surrenders to the Use of himself for Life and after to the Use of R. his Son for Life and after to the Use of his last Will. R. dyes the Father afterwards surrenders it to the Use of J. S. in Fee and dyes without making any Will It s a good Surrender for a Copy-holder may surrender parcel of the Estate and the residue shall be in himself and the Fee Simple of the Copy-hold being limited to the Use of his Will remains in the Copy-holder and not in the Lord Cro. El. 441. Co. 4 Rep. 23. Finch and Hockly and that the Fee lyes not in the Lord is Bullen and Grants Case 1 Leon. p. 174. When one surrenders to the Use of his last Will and thereby deviseth Copy-hold Lands to his middle Son and the Heirs of his Body who dyes without Issue and the Lord grants it to the youngest the eldest Son may enter and Admittance is not necessary Copy-hold devised to pay Debis J. S. seized in Fee of Copy-hold Lands devised it to his Wife for Life and that she should sell the Reversion for the payment of his Debts and after in Court did Surrender the Lands to the Use of his Wife for Life according to the Will and Deed she may sell the Land he surrendered and referred to the Will and she surrendred upon Condition to pay 12. l. this was held to be a good Sale according to the Will Cro. El. 68. Bright and Hubbard If there be two Joynt-Tenants By Joynt-Tenants and the one Surrenders into the Hands of two Tenants to the Use of his last Will and makes a Will of the Land and dyes the Surrender is afterwards presented Per Cur. It s a severance of the Joynture and shall bind the Survivor for being presented it shall relate to the first time of the Surrender Cro. Jac. 800. Porter's Case 1 Brownl Rep. 127. Allen and Nash Pleadings Quod tenens custumar in feodo possit devisare in feodo pro termino vitae vel annorum Coke Ent. 124. Surrender upon Condition or Contingency Copy-holder may Surrender to the Use of another on Condition if the Copy-holder pay to the Surrendree c. ad Domum suam Mansionalem c. that then the Surrender shall be void 5 Rep. 114. Wade's Case A Copy-holder may Surrender to the Use of another reserving Rent Condition Re entry for non-payment of Rent with Condition of re-entry for non-payment and for default of payment he may re-enter 4 H. 6.11.21 H. 6.37 A Copy-holder surrenders upon Condition and afterwards by his Deed releaseth the Condition its good without surrender for properly a Right or Condition cannot be given or determined by Surrender but by Release Cro. Jac. 36. Hull and Shardbrook 4 Rep. Kite and Quinton Surrender to the Use of one in Fee upon Condition to pay 100 l. to a Stranger it was a Question if the tender of 100 l. to a Stranger and he refusing the Condition is saved By Beaumont it is saved aliter in Case of an Obligation where he takes upon him to do it Cro. El. p. 361. Paulter's Case K. L. Father of the Defendant Copyholder in Fee surrendred to the Use of the Defendant in Fee upon Condition he should perform the Covenants in such an Indenture the Defendant was admitted and after surrenders the Land to the Use of the Plaintiff in Fee upon Condition if the Defendant paid 10 l. the Surrender to be void The Defendant neither paid the 10 l. nor performed the Covenant in the Indentures The Father enters and dyes seized and it descends to the Defendant Additional Surrenders defeated by Entry and he enters upon whom the Plaintiff enters The Question was if this Entry were lawful and adjudged it was not for by the Entry of the Father both the Surrenders are defeated So the Defendant may confess and avoid what was done to the Plaintiff Judgment pro Defendente Cro. Eliz. 239. Simonds and Lawnd Trin. 33. Eliz. One cannot pass a Copy-hold Estate to begin at a day to come no not upon a Contingency A Copy-holder saith he surrenders his Copy-hold Estate and if his Child which shall be Born dyes before his Age of 21 years that then his Brother shall have it it s not good This Case falls upon a Rule in Law That one cannot pass a Copy-hold Estate to begin from a day to come nor yet upon a Contingency no more than a Free-hold at Common Law 2 Bulstr 274. Simpson and Southern If a Copy-holder surrenders his Copy-hold of Inheritance into the hands of the Lord Use vests presently the Condition to take effect in futuro to the Use of J. S. paying of an 100 l. to his Executors within such a time after his death he to whose Use this Surrender is made takes by force of this presently Per Dodridge 2 Bulst p. 275. idem Case Surrender upon Condition or Contingency Copy-holder may surrender to the Use of another on condition if the Copy-holder pay 250 l. ad domum suam mansionalem c. that then the Surrender shall be void 5 Rep. 114. Wade's Case A Copy-holder may surrender to the Use of another reserving Rent Condition of re-entry for non-payment of Rent with condition of re-entry for non-payment and for default of payment he may re-enter 4 H. 6.11.21 H. 6.37 A Copy-holder surrenders upon condition and afterwards by his Deed releaseth the condition its good without surrender for properly a right or condition cannot be given or determined by Surrender but by Release Cro. Jac. 36. Hull and Sharebrook 4 Rep. Kite and Quinton Surrender to the Use of one in Fee upon condition to pay 100 l. to a Stranger it was a Question if the tender of the 100 l. to the Stranger and he refusing the condition is saved By Beaumont it is saved aliter in Case of an Obligation where he takes upon him to do it Cro. El. p. 361. Poulter's Case The Form of a Surrender of Copy-hold Land upon Condition Vide Conveyancers Light p. 827. Vide infra Presidents Of Surrender before Admittance whether it shall be good or not Purchaser hath nothing before Admittance neither can he Surrender A Surrender to J. S. J. S. Surrenders to a Stranger who is Admitted The Stranger takes nothing for J. S. had no Estate before Admittance and the right and possession still remains in him who surrendred and this shall descend to his Heir But the diversity is an Heir to whom a Copy-hold descends or comes in remainder he may surrender before Admittance because he is in by course of Law for he Custom which makes him Heir to the Estate casts the Possession upon him from his Ancestors But a Stranger to whom the Copy-hold is surrendred had nothing before Admittance because he is a Purchaser and the Copy made to him upon his Admittance is his Evidence by the Custom and before
mortem sursum redditionem vel forisfacturam of the Feme and after the Husband Surrenders to the Use of B. for Life and so he is Admitted Tenant and after dyes In this Case C. shall not have this because his Estate is not to commence till after the Death Surrender or Forfeiture of the Feme and the Feme here is in Life and had not made any Surrender or Forfeiture and the Wife had right in this in the nature of a plaint de cui in vita But the Lord in this Case may retain it in his own proper hands or disposition Occupant during the Life of the Husband quasi an Occupant Dyer 9 El. 264. Sect. 38. Surrender to whom To the Wife By the Husband to the Use of the Wife is good vide supra and 4 Rep. 29. Bunting's Case for it is done by Surrender to the Lord and Admittance To the Steward A Surrender made to the Steward to the Use of the Steward is good for the Entry is quod sursum reddidit in manus Domini and the Steward is but the Lords Servant and the surrender is to the Lord and not to him Cro. El. p. 717. Erish and Rives So Infant Vide supra Of Countermand of a Surrender Where the Surrender of a Copy-hold may be Countermanded by the Party himself and what collateral Act without the assent and privity of the Party shall be a countermand and where and what not Grant by Baron and Feme shall bind the Feme notwithstanding the Coverture so Grant by non compos mentis Infant Vide supra Vide supra Where and what Grants by Lords of Manors shall be good or defeasible in respect of the Estate they had therein Surrender is not Countermanded by the death of Surrenderor before Presentment 4 Rep. 29 Bunting's Case VVhere the Customs are not pursued the surrenders are void Vide sparsim and 5 Rep. 84. Peryman's Case Surrender by Steward or Deputy Steward and of persuing their Warrants vide Steward supra What remedy to force a Trustee to Surrender A Copy-holder doth surrender to the Use of one A. in Trust In the Lord's Court. that he shall hold the Land until he hath levied certain Monies and that afterwards he shall surrender to the Use of B. The Monies are levied A. is required to make surrender to the Use of B. he refuseth B. exhibits a Bill to the Lord of the Manor against A. who upon hearing of the Cause Decrees against A. That he shall Surrender he refuseth Now the Lord may seize and admit B. to the Copy-hold for he in such case is Chancellor in his own Court Per totam Curiam 1 Leon. 2. Or relief may be had in Chancery CAP. XVI Of Presentment How and when to be made How to be pursuant to the Surrender What the Law is if Surrenderor or Cesty que use or the customary Tenants into whose Hands the Surrender was made dye before Presentment or Admittance VVhere two Surrenders are and the second Surrender is presented first Presentment No good Surrender till presented IF the Surrender be made out of Court into the Hands of the Lord himself which the general Custom will warrant or into the Hands of the Bayliff or of two Tenants of the Manor which is warrantable only by special Custom there must be a true Presentment of the Surrender in Court by the same Persons into whose Hands the Surrender was made and the Admittance of the Lord must be according to the effect and tenor of both the Surrender and Presentment It is not an effectual Surrender till it be presented in Court And therefore in an Action on the Case on Assumpsit in Consideration that the Plaintiff would surrender to the Defendant and his Heirs a Copyhold according to the Custom of the Manor Defendant assumed to pay 500 l. and for breach of this promise the Plaintiff brings the Action and had a Verdict but Judgment was arrested because the Consideration on the Plaintiffs part was not performed for the Consideration was That he should surrender the Copy-hold to the Defendant and his Heirs and he hath alledged the surrender to be into the Hands of a Copy-hold Tenant of the Manor to Use of the Defendant which is no surrender untill it be presented at the next Court and so it is uncertain whether it shall take effect or not Stiles p. 256. Shaan and Shaan The Presentment by the general Custom of Manors is to be made at the next Court day When to be be made immediately after the surrender but by special Custom at the second or third day afterwards and by Rolls in Jay's Case Stiles 275. there is no certain time but as the Custom is so that it be within the Life of the Tenant it is to be made by the same persons that took the Surrender and in points material according to the true tenor of the Surrender But if the Surrender be conditional Presentment must pursue the Surrender and the Presentment absolute the Surrender Presentment and Admittance are void except the Steward in the entry of it omits the Condition and upon sufficient proof made in Court of that the Surrender shall not be avoided but the Roll amended and this shall be no conclusion to the Party to plead or give in Evidence the truth of the matter 4 Rep. 25. Kite and Quinton But in May's Case Norf. Summer Assises 1663. The Custom of a Manor was for a Copy-holder in extremis to surrender into one Tenants Hands in the presence of credible Witnesses and a Surrender was made accordingly but presented to be done to another Tenant yet being proved to be done to a Tenant of the Manor It was holden by Wadham Windham Justice to be good Of Presentment where the Surrenderor or Surrendree Cesty que use or customary Tenants dye before Presentment or Admittance Surrenderor dyes If one Surrender out of Court and dye before Presentment if Presentment be made after his death this is good 4 Rep. 29. Bunting's Case Cesty que use dyes If Cesty que use he to whose Use the Surrender is made dyeth before Presentment yet upon Presentment made after his death his Heir shall be admitted Stiles p. 145. Barker and Denhan Surrenderor and Cesty que use both dye If one Surrender out of Court to the Use of one for Life the Surrenderor and the Lessee for Life both dye before the Presentment yet upon Presentment made he in Remainder shall be Admitted Surrendree dyes Surrendree dyes before Admittance his Heir may be Admitted and if it be Burrough-English the youngest Son 2 Siderfin 38 61. The Tenants into whose hands the Surrender was made dye If the Tenant into whose Hands the Surrender was made dye before Presentment yet upon sufficient proof made in Court That such a Surrender was made the Lord shall be compelled to admit Co. Lit. 62. Nothing passeth till presentment But nothing passeth till Presentment
alledge this as a Grant How a Copy-holder shall plead in making Title to a Copy-hold and this the Law allows for avoiding an inconvenience which will otherwise happen for if the Copy-holder in Pleading shall be put to shew the full Grant either it was before the time of memory and then it is not pleadable or within time of memory and then the Custom fails Admittance pleaded as a Grant and for this cause the Law hath allowed the Copy-holder in Pleading to alledge any Admittance upon a Descent or upon a Surrender as a Grant and yet he may if he will alledge the Admittance of his Ancestor as a Grant and shew the Descent to himself and that he entred and good without any Admittance of him but the Heir cannot plead That his Father was seized in Fee at the Will of the Lord by Copy of Court Roll of such a Manor according to the Custom of the Manor and that he died seized and that it descended to him for in truth such an Interest is but a particular Interest at Will in judgment of Law although it is descendible by the Custom for he is Tenant at Will of the Lord according to the Custom of the Manor 4 Rep. 22. Brown's Case If one Surrender to the intent that the Lord shall grant it to another and he admitts him it was adjuded good yet he ought to plead it as a Grant Lit. Rep. 175. Tenant in Dower may Grant a Copy-hold in Reversion which shall be good Grant of Copy-hold Land in Reversion must be pleaded as a Grant in Reversion and not as a Grant in possession nor by a per nomen though not executed in the Life of Tenant in Dower But then it must be pleaded as a Grant in Reversion and not as a Grant in Possession therefore in Gray's Case Cro. El. p. 661 662. It was there pleaded That he granted Tenementa praedicta per nomen of a Messuage which A. P. held for Life and Per Cur. it s an uncurable Fault for it is not alledged that he granted the Tenement in Reversion and the per nomen will not help Averment del ' vâ—e Tenant by curtesie of Copy-hold brings Ejectment or Action it must appear that he is in Life or else he cannot have Judgment 1 Anderson p. 292. Ewer and Astwick Where in Pleading the Commencement of the. Estate must be shewn or by whom granted or not In matter of Conveyance to a Title need not shew the Conveyance Replevin the Plaintiff in bar to the Avowry shews that the Land was Copy-hold Land grantable in possession or reversion for Life or in Fee and that the Lord granted the Reversion to him after the death of W. who was Tenant pur vie and shews the death of W. whereby he entred And demurred because he did not shew the beginning of W. his Estate nor by whom W. had the Estate granted him Per. Cur. this is no cause of Demurrer because it is not the Plaintiffs Title but matter of Conveyance thereunto Cro. Jac. 52. Lodge and Fry Admittance of the last Heir to be shewed instead of an ancient Grant If one pleads Seisin of a Copy-holder in Fee and claims under him he ought to shew of whose Grant as he ought to shew of any other particular Estate but perhaps that is so ancient that it cannot be shewn who was the first Grantee yet it was held sufficient to shew the Admittance of the last Heir which is in nature of a Grant and may be pleaded by way of Grant Cro. Jac. 103. Pyster and Hembling In Trespass the Defendant justifies he confesseth the Close to be Copy-hold Land but pleads That long time before it was parcel of the Manor of c. and that long before the supposed Trespass one Pole and M. his Wife was Lord of the Manor in right of his Wife for Life remainder to Stephen in Tayl and he made a Lease of this Land to the Defendant it s an ill Plea because the Defendant hath not shewed as he ought how Pole and his Wife came to this Estate for Life the remainder over they ought to shew how this particular Estate hath its commencement they claiming a derivative Estate from Pole and his Wife for years 3 Bulstr 281. Sandford and Stephens None may entitle himself to any Copy-hold but he ought to shew a Grant thereof In Trespass the Plaintiff in his Rejoynder intitles himself because the place where is customary Land parcel of such a Manor whereof J. S. is seized in Fee and demisable by Copy at Will in Fee and that J. N. was seized in Fee by Copy c. and dyed seized so as it descended to two Daughters as Heirs of J. N. and that at such a Court Dominus concessit eis extra manus suas c. Habend tenend Tenementa praedicta to the said Daughters and their Heirs whereby they were seized in Fee and afterwards demised to the Plaintiff for years The Plaintiff hath not made a good Title and he shewing such an one was seized in Fee without shewing the Grant thereof Per Cur. it s not good Cro. Car. 190. Shepherd's Case yet it was but default of form and Issue for the Plaintiff being found it is a Jeofail Pleading Custom or Prescription A Copy-holder in Pleading need not alledge a Custom to make a Surrender for that is the Custom of all England A Copy-holder need not alledge a Custom to make a Lease for a year It must be pleaded that he used to do it It is not sufficient to alledge a Custom that one might do such an Act but that he used to do it as to alledge dimissibile and dimissum therefore in Brown and Foster's Case the Defendant avows in Replevin for Damage feasant the Plaintiff makes Title as Copy-holder and shews that within the Manor of A. time whereof c. Talis habebatur habetur consuetudo c. That any Copy-holder may surrender into the Hands of two Customary Tenants c. this is not well pleaded for it is pleaded by Usage and Custom but he doth not plead that ever it was put in ure in that manner which ought to be alledged as in Sir William Hatton's Case where it was pleaded Quod Talis habebatur consuetudo within a Manor Quod licebit Seneschallâ— to impose a Fine c. But in the principal Case the not naming the Steward made the Avowry ill and then Per Cur. the Avowry being ill although the bar to the Avowry were ill Not naming the Steward in the Avowry ill yet he cannot have return Cro. p. 37. El. 392. Brown and Foster Copy-holder pleads Quod infra Manerium praed talis habetur nec non a toto tempore cujus contrarij memoria hominum non existit habebatur consuetudo videl quod quilibet tenens custumar ' praedict tenementa c. hath used to have Common in such a place parcel of the Manor Question was if the
Custom may be alledged within the Manor and applied but to a single Copy-hold Per Cur. such Custom as well for the form as the matter is good for a Copy-holder cannot prescribe in his own name for the exility of his Estate Precribe for Common in one Copy-holder but he ought to prescribe in the Lords name when he claims Common c. out of the Land of a Stranger but if he claim such profit in the Manor he must lay it by way of Custom for then he cannot prescribe in the Lords Name for the Lord cannot prescribe to have Common in his own Soil and one Copy-holder may have such Common c. It may have a lawful commencement and all the other Copyholds may be extinct 4 Rep. 31 32. Foyston's Case vide for Prescription devant In Trespass the Defendant justifies as Copy-holder for Common he saith these are customary Lands but doth not say ad voluntatem Dom. which is uncertain whether Tenant-right Lands or Burrough-English or Free-hold Judgment Pro Quer. 3 Keb. 368. Walker and Wilson Customs must be pursued in Pleadings A man cannot plead a Prescription against a Prescription A Prescription not to be pleaded against Prescription but he ought to answer the Prescription alledged in the Count when two Customs repugne Cro. Car. 432. Spooner and Day 's Case Carter's Rep. 88. Custom alledged to be That if any Copy-holder seised of customary Lands of the said Copy-hold die seized thereof having many Sons that the youngest shall Inherit and the Defendant in Replevin makes his Title That a customary Estate was granted to the Father and Mother and the Heirs of the Father and the Mother survived This Estate is not within the Letter of the Custom Per Walmsly and cited Sir John Savage's Case Quod vide supra sub Tit. Custom 2 Leon. 208. Beal and Langly A particular Tenant at Will may not prescribe in his sole Tenancy Prescription by a particular Tenant at Will but when the Prescription and the Custom runs half through the Manor he may well lay it by Custom Kelloway 76 77. Tropnel's Case Tenant may plead a Custom to enjoy without interruption of the Lord. Copy-holder may plead a Custom That every Tenant after he hath paid the Lord his Fine may enjoy his Lands and Tenements granted by Copy during their Estates Terms or Interests without interruption or expulsion of the Lord for the time being they performing their Services and doing nothing that may Forfeit Kelloway 76 77. Ann Tropnel's Case Vide supra When the Copy-holder claims any thing by Prescription in the Soil of another in Pleading he ought to prescribe in the name of the Lord but if he claim any thing in the Soil of the Lord When it must be pleaded by way of Custom and when by way of Prescription within the Manor then he shall plead the Custom of the Manor for there he cannot plead in the name of the Lord in as much as the Lord cannot prescribe in his own Soil Foyston's Case and 4 Rep. 31. Cooper's Case 6 Rep. 60. Gateward's Case Rule There is nothing more common than for the Lord to prescribe for his Tenants by Copy in another mans Land whereas if it be in his own it shall ever be laid per Custom Hob. p. 28 61. Of Pleading a Custom for Common by Prescription Defendant pleads in Trespass That there are divers Freehold Tenements time out of mind in the said Manor c. and that there were and are infra eand villan divers customary Tenements parcel of the said Manor grantable ad voluntatem Dom. by Copy That all the Tenants of the Free Tenements time out of mind Habuerunt usi fuerunt and all the Tenants of the customary Tenements per consuetudinem ejusdem manerij in eodem manerio a toto tempore supra dict usitat approbat habuerunt habere consueverunt solam separalem pasturam c. for all their Cattel Hogs Sheep and Steers excepted Levant and Couchant upon their respective Messuages and Tenements every year for all times of the year except c. as belonging and appertaining to their several Tenements and that at the time of the Trespass the Defendant put in his own Cattel Levant and Couchant upon this said Messuage prout ei bene licuit c. Exceptions to this Pleading were 1. That he was seised de Antiquo Messuagio and of no Land is not proper for in common intention Cattel cannot be said to be Levant upon a Messuage only 2. He saith he put in his own Levant and Couchant but avers not as he ought That none of them were Porci Oves or Steers 3. The Plea doth not set forth the Custom of the Manor but implicitely That the Freehold and customary Tenants have had and enjoyed Per Consuetudinem Manerij solam separalem Pasturam for all their Cattel which is a double Plea both of the Custom of the Manor and of the claim by reason of the Custom which ought to be several and the Court shall judge and not the Jury whether the claim be according to the Custom alledged the Custom may be different from the Claim Per Consuetudinem Manerij if particularly alledged Vaughan's Rep. 253. North and Cole In Replevin Defendant makes Conuzance as Bayliff to c. Damage Fesant In bar of this Cognizance the Plaintiff pleads That H. Earl of H. was seized of the Manor of A. whereof one Messuage c. is parcel and demisable by Copy and that within the said Manor there is this Custom That every customary Tenant of the said Messuage c. have used to have Pasture c. in the said place called Land-Mead The Form how to apply the Custom of a Manor to a particular Messuage in pleading and so derives his Title by Grant by Copy the Issue was upon the Traverse Absque hoc quod infra manerium praed talis habetur consuetudo quod quilibet tenens custumarius c. have used to have Common c. prout c. Here is no Custom alledged because it did not appear in Pleading That the place where the taking was supposed to be was within the said Manor and no Custom of the Manor can extend out of the Manor but he ought to prescribe in the Manor Note he ought to have pleaded That the place in which c. was parcel of the Manor and then the Plea had been good Hob. p. 286. 1 Brownl 172. Roberts and Young Plaintiff in Replevin rejoyns by Custom of all the Copyholders of Blackacre in the Manor of D. used to have Common in A. to which the Avowant demurred because he should have prescribed in the Lords name A. being out of the Manor but the truth being that A. was anciently parcel and lately severed by the Lord this destroys not the Common Per Cur. But the Copy-holder ought to prescribe specially That Talis consuetudo suit till such a day Special Prescription
per Copie Co. Ent. 180. per Title Surrender Admittance Fine Repl Bar per Title al custumarie terres al J. Feme de H. in Fee descent al Def. Repl H. J. ad talem curiam ead J. existen sola examinatur per seneseal surrender al use de quer Rej. maintenance de discent travers quod J. fuit sola examinatur 3 Brownl 270. TrnsÌ„ Bar quod J. seisitus de terris custumar surrender al use de S. qui fuit admit descent Def. replie qd I. surrender sur condicon de payment Et quod obtulit denar quos def recusavit Rej. non obtulit denar Co. Ent. 657. Repl Bar quod D. seisitus de maner grants custumar terres al Def. pur vie Replic S. prius seisitus de Maner grant al Plaintiff pur vie Rej. Plaintiff surrender al use del J. c. Surrej maintenance del Avowry Traverse le surrend Hern 653. 753. Vide. Surrender Descent Avowre que W. Roy seise de Manor grant in Fée al M. qui surrend al use de Def. ReplÌ„ W. prius seisitus de manerio grant al J. de quo descend al P. qui surrend al use de M. pur vie qui demise al querenti Rej. W. devant grant al J. grant al B. de quo descend al M. qui surrend al Def. Et Traverse grant al J. Co. Ent. 575. TrnsÌ„ Bar quod E. seisitus de Manor pur vie grant al Def. in Fée ReplÌ„ H. seisitus de rever de Manor puis mort de E. grant terres al quer Traverse grant al Def. Co. Ent. 660. TrnsÌ„ Bar quod Abbas seise de Manor grant custumar terres al J. H. in Fée H. surrend al use de R. qui fuit admitur de luy descend al Def. Replic quod Terres descendebant juniori filio per consuetur manerij Abbot granted al dit R. contra consuetur qui mor seise Abbas restituend grant al quer junior filio traverse que Abbas granted al J. H. Rast Ent. 627. TrnÌ„s Bar quod dominus manerij ob certas causas seisivit terras custumarias unde E. fuit seisitus pur vie grant al M. in Fóe. E. Release M. Surrend al use de Def. qui fuit admissus ReplÌ„ E. mor seisie discent querentur Traverse le Release 3 Browl. 463. TrnsÌ„ Bar quod T. seisitus de Manor grant per Copie al Def. pur vie ReplÌ„ Abbot prius seisitus grant al R. pur vie puis grant le Revereon al Plaintiff pur vie Rej. Abbot devant grant in reversion demise Manor pur ans al J. le Roy seise per surrend del Abbot grant Manor al dit T. Surrej Maintenance de grant in Reversion per Copie Traverse demise de Manor Co. Entr. 662. TransÌ„ Bar ê‘ frank-tenement ReplÌ„ que terre fuit customar fuit grant per Copie pur vies Et per Custome Feme Plaintiff est seise pÌ„ son free Bench 3 Brownl 474. TrnsÌ„ Bar ê‘ frank-tenement Replic R. seisitus de Manor grant ê‘ Copie en Fée al J. qui surrender al use de Plaintiff qui est admit Rej. ê‘ consuetud maner Dominus habere debet finem pro admissione Et quer forisfecit terÌ„as ê‘ finem insolutur SurÌ„ej finis non fuit rationabilis Demur inde Co. Ent. 657. Quod J. seisitus de maner unde terÌ„e custumar discend fun filio ê‘ consuetur concessit terÌ„as viro Vx. herÌ„d viri Vxor suê‘ vixit reversio discend fratri de eo dese juniori filio Hern 679. Bar in Repl quod T. W. was seized of the Manor of H. unde locus in quo est parcel custumar terÌ„es in Fee Custom of the Manor was for every Tenant to hold successive as they are named in the Copy W. grants to Iohn Podger and E. and M. his Daughters for their Lives Iohn enters and was seized for Life he dyes and E. enters and was seized for Life she afterwards marries the Plaintiff by which he was seized in right of his Wife and put in his Beasts until c. and avers the Life of the Wife Repl Def. protestando the place in Question is not parcel of the Manor of H. c. pro placito he confesseth the seisin of W. of the said Manor unde c. and that there was such a Custom as the Plaintiff hath alledged and that W. granted to Podger and his Daughter for Lives and shews the entry and seisin of the Father But farther saith That W. by Indenture Enrolled bargained and sold the place in Question to Iohn Podger in Fee and the Act of 27 H. 8. De uses proclamatur upon a Fine according to the 4 H. 7. and the Fine levied to the Use of Iohn Podger in Fee he dyes and the Premisses descend to Marmaduke his Son who levies another Fine of the Premisses to the Use of him and M. his Wife and the Heirs of the Husband The Husband dies his Wife survives and enters into the Premisses and after the Plaintiff enters and puts in Beasts c. upon whose possession the Wife re-enters and the Defendant takes the Beasts of the Plaintiff E. did not claim within five years and that the Plaintiff and his Wife were barred Upon Demurrer general to the Replication and Rejoinder the Judgment of the Court was That the Fine was not a bar Winch Ent. p. 926 ad 929. Vide the Argument of this Case 9 Rep. Margaret Podgers Case Avowry ê‘ Lessée pÌ„ ans del Evesque pÌ„ Damage Fezant averre le vie del Evesque Bar que le lieu est parcel d'un Mannor demisable ê‘ Copie intitle luy mesme ê‘ Copie grante ê‘ pdecessor del Evesque Defend maintaine son Avowry Traverse le Prescription del Copy-hold placita Gen Spec 579. Bar to the Conisance in Replevin That the 10 Acres are Copy-hold parcel of the Manor of W. And King H. 8 seized of this Manor grants by Copy the said 10 Acres to R. D. he dies and a descent to Grace and Alice his Daughters and Co-heirs Grace dies a descent to S. E. her Son who demiseth his part for a year Kepe the Defendant protestur that the 10 Acres are not Copy-hold and that King H. 8. had not granted to R. pro plto That King H. 8. was seized of those 10 Acres in Fee in jur corone and died seized and descent to King Edw. 6. who grants them to K. F. and W. F. in Fee R. releaseth to W. W. dyes sole seized descent to W. his Son and Heir W. the Son dies without Issue descent to K. Father of W. in the Conisance Fine with Proclamation to the Use of R. F. Father of the said W. in the Conisance named seisin in Fee R. dies descent to W. named in the Conisance who entred and was seized in Fee and because the Beasts were Damage fesant he maintains his Conisance Demurs
c. is but a Conveyance to his Title and for that it was found that it was demisable in Fee and that it was demised unto him in Fee this is the substance of his Title and so sufficient Cro. Eliz. p. 431. Doyle and Wood. In Eject Fir. If the Jury find a special Verdict That J. S. was seized of the Manor of D. in his Demesn as of Fee in which Manor was a Copy-holder of the place where c. and commits Waste by cutting down an Oak and that after J. S. dies and the Lessor of the Plaintiff being his Cousin and Heir enters in the Manor in the place where c. for the said Forfeiture and was of this seized in his Demesn as of Fee and concludes si super totam materiam c. This is not a good Verdict because it is not found that J. S. died seized of the Manor and that this descends to the Lessor Seisin and descent as Cousin and Heir as his Cousin and Heir for it may be that J. S. aliened the Land and that the Father of the Lessor or the Lessor himself re-purchased this and that he was also Cousin and Heir to J. S. and although it be in a Verdict it shall not be intended that the Fee continued in J. S. at the time of his death and that he died thereof seized without finding it 2 Rolls Abr. 699. Cornwallis and Hammond Part found the Issue upon the whole not good In Replevin The Defendant justifies by reason of Common to such a Copy-hold for all Beasts Levant and Couchant and avers that these Beasts were Levant and Couchant c. upon which the Parties are at issue and it is found that part of the Beasts were Levant and Couchant and part not this is found for the Defendant for the whole for the issue was upon the whole and the contrary is found 2 Rolls Abr. 707. Sloper and Allen. Presidents in Special Verdicts Quod Tenementa sunt custumaria dimissibilia per Copiam dimissio per Dominum ex traditione propria 1 Rep. 117. Chudleigh 's Case Sursum redditio admissio in feodo Co. Entr. 207. Simile in Tallio communis recuperatio inde Co. Entr. 206. Tenementa concessa per copiam la A. B. super vixit Co. Ent. 273. Consuetudo infra manerium de devisatione devisatio in haec verba Co. Ent. 124. Littera Attornat ' ad sursum reddend ' tenementa custumaria sursum redditio admissio superinde Coke Entr. 576 577. Et si sit sufficiens in Lege Manerium Tenementa ab antiquo discendebant 2 percenariis qui fecer ' partitionem de terris dominicalibus ac Tenementa Custumaria servitia remanser ' in communi Coke Entr. 711. Officium Seneschalli manerij execut ' per deput ' contentio inter 2 Seneschallos de Cur. Baron Tenend 9 Rep. 45. In Ejectment Jury find that the Lands are demisable by Lives in possession or reversion and that the Widow in possession held the Lands so long as she remained sole and chaste and that M. C. Widow was seized for Life durante viduitate the Lord grants the Reversion of the said Lands by Copy to R. C. the Son of M. for Life to commence after the death forfeiture or surrender of M. M. surrenders one moiety of the Premisses to R. The Lord dies discent of the Manor to C. S. his Cousin and Heir R. Tenant for Life of one moiety and M. Tenant in Free-Bench of the other moiety the Lord by Indenture demiseth to the Lessor of the Plaintiff for 99 years if he and J. and B. his Sons shall so long live to commence after the death and determination of the Estates of the said M. and R. and of the viduity of such person as shall be his Wife at the time of his death M. surrenders her moiety to R. R. dies seized of both moieties P. C. the Defendant his Wife is admitted she commits Fornication and had a Bastard Jury find the entry of the Lessor If the Lease shall commence before P. dies was the Question Winch Ent. 455. Jury found that the Messuage and Lands tempore quo c. tempore hors memory were custumary part of the Manor of B. a Prebend of S. demisable by Copy of Court Roll for one two or three Lives and that by the Custom of the Manor every Tenant for Life sole seized of any customary Estate for Life in possession may nominate one to succeed him to be Tenant to the Lord for Life and that the party nominated used to require his Admittance and pay such Fines as were taxed by the Homage Another Custom was That every customary Tenant sole seized in possession may cut Timber Trees c. and that Mason the Defendant being Copy-holder for Life 1 May 40 Eliz. named R. P. to be his succeeding Tenant They also find that Robert P. being Prebendary of the said Prebend and seized in Fee of the said Manor 20 March 40 Eliz. demised by Indenture the Manor of B. to Peter Hoskins for three Lives and by the said Indenture Bargains and Sells to him all the Timber Trees c. by which Indenture is a Letter of Attorny to make Livery and they find the Indorsement on the Indenture to this effect Midd. That J. B. one of the Attornies entred into part and made Livery Midd. That J. G. the other Attorny entred into part and made Livery The Livery made in the House of the Lord was Endorsed but it is not mentioned to be part of the Manor The Jury find the entry of Peter Hoskins and seisin for three Lives according to the Lease which aids the other Imperfections Verdict aided 1 Jan. 43 Eliz. Peter Hoskins demiseth to J. Hoskins Masons Tenement and Lands for 99 years March 3 Jac. Mason continuing customary Tenant for Life after his nomination aforesaid cut down 20 Trees off his Copy-hold upon which J. Hoskins 6 Jac. entred upon the Land and demised to the Plaintiff who enters upon Mason who re-enters and if his re-entry be lawful they find for Mason After non-suit one of the Defendants was dead this suggestion must be entred on the Roll. and if not lawful they find for the Defendant Winch Ent. 440. Rowls and Mason In Ejectment to try the Custom of E. of Copies for three Lives the Plaintiff was non-suit and one of the Defendants being dead Hales Chief Justice advised to enter a Suggestion on the Roll That one was dead or else the Judgment for the Defendant on the non-suit will be erroneous as to all 2 Keb. 832. Hawthorn versus Bawden CAP. XXXV Copy-holders relieved in Chancery or what things in respect of Copy-hold Estates are relievable in Chancery or not NOW I conceive it will not be impertinent but rather a thing well approved of to cite some Cases Resolutions and Decrees wherein Copy-holders have been relieved and what remedy the Chancellor will give in respect of Lords
and how they differ What Customs for Harriots are good or not Where they shall be apportioned and by whose Acts. Who shall pay Harriot or not and the Pleadings CAP. XXVI What Statutes extend to Copy-hold Lands and within what Statutes Copy-hold Lands shall be contained by Construction of Law without express words and what not and therein how Copy-holds shall be barred by Fine and non-claim c. CAP. XXVII Of Embleaments Who shall have them the Lord or the Copy-holder CAP. XXVIII What shall be said a Disseisin as to Copy-hold Estates or not CAP. XXIX Of Actions and Suits What Actions may be brought by the Lord and what Actions may be brought by Copy-holders or their Executors against the Lord or against Strangers in respect to their Copy-hold Estates and Priviledges CAP. XXX Of Copy-holders being impleaded and impleadable in the Lords Court and a Faux Judgment in the Lords Court and how and where to be relieved CAP. XXXI Of Declarations of for and concerning Copy-hold Estates how to be brought and laid and Presidents in what Cases they have been brought CAP. XXXII Of Pleadings The general Rules of Pleading as to Copy-hold Estates The different Forms of Pleading Customs and Prescriptions Of Pleading in reference to Common belonging to Copy-hold and when to be pleaded by way of Custom or by way of Prescription The manner of Pleading when a Lease is to be answered which is set forth in the Avowry Where in pleading the Commencement of the Estate must be shewed and by whom granted or not And how a Licence must be pleaded by the Lessee Prescription of Copy-holder to be discharged of Tythes how to be pleaded Of Traverses when how and where to be taken Forms of Pleading of Surrenders Admittances Estates in Fee Tayl for Lives or Years Pleadings of Presentments and Grants Presidents of bars by Commons Woods Ways Inclosures Forfeitures and all other Pleadings necessary for the Copy-holder to set forth his Title or defend it CAP. XXXIV Evidence Tryal Issue What shall be a good Evidence to prove the Custom alledged or not What shall be tryed by the Jury and what by the Court Rolls Who may be admitted to give Evidence When Issue is taken upon a Surrender where to be tryed Venue CAP. XXXIV Of Special Verdicts Imperfect Custom not well found Failure of Prescription How the Custom must be found by the Jury Presidents of special Verdicts CAP. XXXV How and in what Cases Copy-holders have been relieved in Chancery Presidents of Conveyances respecting Copy-hold Estates and Presidents of Surrenders Grants Admittances Presentments Lex Custumaria OR A TREATISE OF Copy-hold ESTATES c. CAP. I. Of the Original and Nature of a Manor and of what it consists Of a Manor Real and by Reputation Of a Customary Manor Of Grants and Leases of Manors with respect to this Subject of Copy-holds and what shall be said Parcel of a Manor or what shall be said a Severance FOR the right understanding of the Law as to Copy-hold Estates it 's necessary to premise something of the Nature and Notion of a Manor upon which they depend as the Materia though Custom is the Form thereof And I shall say no more of Manors than what shall have a direct influence upon the Explication of the nature of Copy-hold Original of Manors As for the Original of Manors Take this brief Account out of Perkins 670. Horns Mirror Lib. 1. Cap. de Roy Alfred Fulbeck f. 18. Lambert verbo Thaine Bacon's Elements of the Law 41 42 c. The ancient Kings of this Realm who had all the Lands of England in Demesn that is in their own Hands or totally at their own disposal did grant a certain compass or circuit of Ground upon some great Personages with liberty to parcel out the Lands to other inferior Tenants reserving such Duties and Services as they thought fit with power to keep Courts where they might redress Misdemeanors within such their Precincts and decide Controversies of meum and tuum within their Jurisdictions these Lords and Noblemen performing such Services and paying and yielding such Rents as the said Kings by their Grants reserved These Grantees were called Barons and were such as came to Parliament and from thence it keeps the name of Court Baron to this day though in process of time by the Grants of such Barons these Lands and Manors came into the Hands of meaner Men by Purchase c. as it is at this day And according to this our Custom all Lands holden in Fee throughout France are divided into Feifs and Arrear-Feifs into Feifs or Knights Fees and Mesne Fees whereof the former are such as were granted by the King the second such as the Kings Feudatories do again grant to others Now by Justice Winch in his Argument in the Case of Rowles and Mason 2 Brownlow 195. Manors are divided into three sorts of Tenures 1. The first holds by Knight Service and this is for defence of the Lord. 2. The second holds by Socage and this is to Plow and Manure the Demesns of the Lord c. since turn'd into Rent 3. The third holds by base Tenure and these are at the will of the Lord and these were to do Services and some had greater Priviledges than others to encourage them to perform their Services as it is in Ireland at this day Out of these by length of time and Custom sprang up the Race of Copy-holders For the Name or Etymology of the word Manor Etymology some fancy it to be Manerium quasi Manurium from manuring the Ground and then it takes its Name either from the Lords Demesns which the Tenants are bound to Manure or from the Lands remaining in the Tenants hands and others with more probability think it to be derived from the French word Mesner to govern or guide because the Lord hath the government of the Tenants within his Jurisdiction But that I may come to the thing intended and to leave the flourishes of guess and fancy It is a Maxim common in our Books Of what a Manor consists Demesns what That a Manor consists of Demesns and Services As for the word Demesns Dominicum or Domainium it is taken it two senses It is most properly taken for those Lands which remain in the Kings hands and so all Subjects are excluded from being seized in Dominico and we have little of that now but ancient Demesn Lands which are such as were in the hands of King Edward the Confessor But in a sense less proper Demesn Lands may be said to be in the hands of an inferior Lord or Tenant and as my Lord Coke on Littleton f. observes the form of Pleading shews this difference for an inferior Lord or Tenant never pleads That he is seized in Dominico absolutely but qualified with this addition in dominico suo ut de feodo Pleading and the word Fee or Feif implies that his Estate is not absolute but depending on some superior Lord. So
of Fines the Plaintiff shewed divers Court Rolls of Admittances upon Surrenders and that the Fines taken by the Lord were not certain but sometimes one sometimes another Per Curiam To prove a Custom for uncertainty of Fines and not to be certain two years Rent there ought to be shewed Court Rolls Fines upon Discent and Purchase and that in Cases of Descents and that upon such Admittances they used to pay two years Rent the proof ought to be in case of Descents for in case of a Surrender or Purchase the Lord may take what Fine he will But such Fines are no proof to prove the taking uncertain Fines by the Custom but the same ought to be in cases of Descents Of Fines reasonable Excessive Fines how to be determined But where the Fines are uncertain yet the Lord cannot exact excessive Fines and if the Copy-holder deny to pay it it shall be determined by the Opinion of the Judges before whom the matter depends Hubbard and Hamon's Case cited 1 Brownl 186.4 Rep. 27. mesme Case Co. Lit. 59 60. To this purpose is Denny and Lemon's Case Hobart p. 135. Copy-holder brought Trespass against his Lord. Defendant pleads he had admitted the Copy-holder and had assessed a Fine of twenty Nobles and had appointed him to pay it to his Bayliff at his House within the Manor three Months after and alledged he had not paid it The Plaintiff demurs Whether in pleading the reasonableness of the Fine must be averred for that the Lord had not averred the Fine was reasonable But Per Cur. the Lord is not bound to aver it but it must come on the Copy-holders side to shew the circumstances of the Case to make it appear to the Court to be unreasonable and so to put it upon the Judgment of the Court for the Fine in Law is arbitrary and is due to the Lord of common Right and it is only in point of excuse to the Tenant if it be unreasonable and the Court shall judge the unreasonableness of it The Copy-holder if he be Defendant may plead not Guilty and then it shall come in Evidence whether the Fine were reasonable or not and so is the Opinion of my Lord Coke Comment upon Lit. Sect. 74. The reasonableness saith he shall be discussed by the Justices upon the true circumstances of the case appearing unto them and if the Court where the Cause dependeth adjudgeth the Fine exacted unreasonable then is not the Copy-holder compellable to pay it for all excessiveness is abhorred in the Law It was argued in Wheeler and Honor's Case That all Fines are reasonable unless the contrary appear 1 Keb. 154. What Customs are good as to payment of Fines Of Fines due by the Copy-holder to the Lord some be by change or alteration of the Lord and some by change or alteration of the Tenant If the Fine be due by the alteration of the Lord such alteration must be by act of God Fines due by the alteration of the Lord. for if the Lord do alledge a Custom within his Manor to have a Fine of every one of his Copy-holders at the alteration or change of the Lord of the Manor be it by alienation demise death or otherwise this Custom is against the Law as to the change of the Lord by the act of the Party for by that means the Copy-holders should be oppressed by the multitudes of Fines by the Lords own act but when the change groweth by the act of God there the Custom is good By the act of God as by the death of the Lord Co. Lit. 59. b. Due by the alteration of the Tenant But it is a good Custom that the Copy-holder had used to pay a Fine upon every alteration of the Tenant either by the act of God or by the act of the Party Co. Lit. 59. b. Armstrong's Case The Fine is to be assessed by the Lord. The Fine by whom to be assessed But in some places the Custom is That the succeeding Copy-holder shall compound with the Lord for his Fine and if he cannot compound then the Homage of the Manor shall assess the Fine as was the Case of Ford and Hoskins Cro. Jac. 368. Custom not to pay a Fine till full Age. The Custom is not to pay a Fine till one come to Age it s a good Custom 3 Keb. 90. agreed to in Champian and Atkinson's Case Fines as to Admittances to Reversions or Remainders Copy-holder in Fee surrenders to the Use of another for Life when Lessee dyes he shall not pay a Fine for his Admittance to the Reversion for this continues always in him 2 Rep. 107. Margaret Podger's Case If Copy-holder in Fee surrender to the Use of one for Life the Remainder to another for Life the Remainder to another in Fee there is but one Fine due for the particular Estate and the Remainders are but one Estate 1 Rolls Abr. 505. What refusal to pay a Fine shall be a Forfeiture or not If the Fine be uncertain Notice to be given if the Fines be uncertain notice must be given before there be a Forfeiture aliter if the Fine be certain but yet Denny and Lemon's Case is good Law Time and place must be ascertained and refusal must be proved 1 Keb. 154. 4 Rep. 27 28. The Lord assesseth a Fine of 12 l. to be paid by a Copy-holder Tendring the Fine certain though not the Fine assess'd is no forfeiture and appoints it to be paid at his Capital Messuage of the Manor three Months after and the Copy-holder pretending the Fine to be certain viz. two years Quit-Rent offered at the day of assessing the Fine according to the Rent for two years but at the day appointed for the payment thereof cometh not thither to excuse his non-payment nor makes any other refusal Per Cur. this is in Law a forfeiture of his Copy-hold but if he had come at the day assigned him for the payment and had then tendred the two years Quit-Rent being the Fine certain though not the Fine assessed it had been no forfeiture Cro. Jac. p. 617. Gardner and Norman It is adjudged in the Case of Dalton and Hammond More n. 851. If the Fine be certain the Tenant is to bring it with him to the Court and pay it before Admittance and if he be not ready to pay it it s a Forfeiture aliter of the refusal to pay an excessive Fine Where a Copy-holder hath divers several Lands For every several Tenure several Fines severally holden by several Services by Copy there the Lord may assess and demand Fines severally for every parcel which is so severally held for the Tenant may refuse to pay a Fine for the one and so forfeit this and yet pay the Fines for the others and for every several Tenure the Lord ought to demand and assess a several Fine as in Tavernor and Cromwel's Case 4 Rep. 28. Hobart and Hamond's Case How the
re-grant it to him again If a Copy-hold Escheat to the Lord Escheat and he alien the Manor by Fine Feoffment c. his Alienee may re-grant this Land by Copy for it was always demised or demisable but if it be a particular Copy-hold Estate otherwise as was said in the beginning of this Case 4 Rep. 31. Frenches Case If a Copy-holder sue Execution of a Statute against the Lord of a Manor Not destroyed by execution of the Manor at the Copy-holders Suit and had the Manor in Execution and after the Debt is levied the Interest of the Copy-hold remains Per Manwood Heydon's Case Savills Rep. A Copy-holder in Fee marries a Woman Suspended Seignioress of the Manor and after they suffer a Common Recovery which was to the Use of themselves for Life Remainder over by some the Copy-hold is extinct for by the Recovery the Husband had gained an Estate of Freehold But Per Cur. by the inter-marriage it was only suspended Cro. El. p. 7. Anonymus If a Copy-holder accept of a Lease for years of the Manor or marry the Lords Wife by this the Copy-hold is not extinct but suspended If a Copy-hold be granted to three for Lives Suspended and the first of them take an Estate by Deed with livery from the Lord by this the Copy-hold for that Life is suspended Dyer 30. 4 Rep. 31. No prejudice to the Wife or to him in reversion Baron seized of a Manor in right of his Feme let Copy-hold Land parcel thereof for years by Indenture and dyed this doth not destroy the Custom as to the Wife but that after the death of her Husband she may demise by Copy as before So If Tenant pur vie of a Manor let a Copy-hold parcel of the Manor for years and dyes it shall not destroy the Custom as to him in Reversion Cro. El. P. 38 Eliz. Conesby and Rusketh for being Tenant pur vie he may not do wrong by destroying of Customs King H. 8. grants Lands being parcel of Copy-hold of a Manor without reciting this to be Copy-hold to Sir J. G. pur vie Sir J. G. morust Queen Mary grants the Manor to Susan Tenny in Fee who let the Manor for years to Lee. Lee before his years expired grants the Land in question to R. L. in Fee according to the Custom of the Manor Lee's years expire R. L. let to Field at will and the Defendant enters as Heir to Tenny Judgment pro Quer. Suspension and not Destruction of a Custom Kings Prerogative The Grant of the King is but a suspension and no destruction of the Custom And though the Maxim is It ought to be demised and demisable c. yet this holds not in the case of the King 2 Siderfin p. 142. Vide contra 1 Rolls Abr. 498. Downcliff and Minors Vide sub Tit. Grants by the Lord. As to the escheating of Copy-holds after escheating it cannot properly be called a Copy-hold Escheat except it be because there is power in him to re-grant it as Copy-hold Were it by Custom that the Wife shall be endowed of the intierty or moiety and such customary Copy-hold Lands Escheat and the Husband dyes The Wife not to be endowed after Escheat his Wife shall not be endowed of the intierty or moiety because the Custom as to her is extinct 2 Siderfin 19. A Copy-hold Escheated may be demised notwithstanding the Lords Continuance of it in his Hands above 20 years 2 Keb. 213. Pemble and Stern Note If the Copy-holder of a Manor hath had time out of memory Copy-hold extinct but not a Way over the Copy-hold Land a Way over the Land of another Copy-holder and he purchaseth the Inheritance of his Copy-hold by which the Copy-hold is extinct yet by this the Way is not extinct 1 Rolls Abr. 933. Empson and Williamson CAP. XXIV How and where Copy-holder shall hold his Lands charged or not by the Lord or Copy-holders as Dowers Rent-charges Statutes And how and where they shall be avoided THE Lord of a Manor in which were Copy-holders for Lives takes a Wife Dower of the Lords Wife and after a Copy-holder dyes the Lord after Coverture grants the Lands again according to the Custom of the Manor for Lives and dyes the Lords Widow shall not avoid these Grants in a Writ of Dower yet the Custom which is the Life of the Grant was long before 4 Rep. 24. If Feoffee of a Manor upon Condition make voluntary Grants of Copy-hold Estates according to Custom and after the Condition is broken By Feoffee a Manor upon condition and Feoffee re-enters yet the Grants by Copy shall stand Earl of Arundel's Case cited in Co. 4 Rep. 24. Copy-holder by voluntary grant not subject to the Lords Charges The Copy-holder which comes in by voluntary Grant shall not be subject to the Charges or Incumbrances of the Lord before the Grant 8 Rep. 63. Swain's Case Lord of a Manor where the Custom was of Land demisable for one two or three Lives that he that was first named in the Copy should enjoy it only for his Life and so the second The Remainder preserves the Estate from Charges c. grants it to J. P. and E. and M. his Daughters for their Lives if the Lord had charged the Inheritance of the Copy-hold J. P. shall not hold it charged during his Life for the mean Estates in Remainder preserve the Estate of J. P. by Copy from the Incumbrances of the Lord 9 Rep. 107. Margaret Podger's Case Rent charge Earl of W. seized of Manor by Copy grants a Rent-charge to Sir W. Cordel for the term of his Life and conveys the Manor to Sir W. Clifton in Tayl the Rent is behind Sir W. Cordrel dyes the Manor descends to Sir John Clifton who grants a Copy-hold to H. The Executors of Sir W. Cordel distrain for the Rent Per Cur. the Copy-holder shall hold the Land charged 2 Leon. p. 152. and 109. Cordel and Clifton But it hath been adjudged That the Wife of the Lord shall not be endowed against the Copy-holder for the Title of Dower is not consummated before the death of the Husband so as the Title of Copy-holder is compleated before the Title of Dower and in this Case the Seisin and possession continues in Sir John Clifton who claims only by Sir William Clifton who was the Tenant in Demesn who ought to pay the Rent Lord and Copy-holder for Life be the Lord grants a Rent-charge out of the Manor Rent charge by the Lord upon the Manor whereof the Copy-hold is parcel the Copy-holder surrenders to the Use of A. who is admitted accordingly he shall not hold it charged but if the Copy-holder dyeth so that his Estate is determined and the Lord granteth to a Stranger de novo to hold the said Land by Copy this new Tenant shall hold the Land charged 1 Leon. p. 4. Lord of a Manor where Lands were
per quod quer ' communiam suam predict pro averiis suis c. in tam amplo beneficiali modo prout antea habuit c. habere non potuit This is a good Declaration though the Commoner cannot have any Damage for the taking and carrying away the Turffs yet the coming on the Land with Horse and Carts is a prejudice to the Common and the per quod the Common is impaired is the cause of Action and the carrying away a means to impair it 1 Rolls Abr. 89. Terry and Goodier and good tho' Damages were entire Action shall be brought in a Copy-holder Lunaticks name for though the custody of the Land was granted to one by the Lord yet no Interest was gained by this commitment and the Lord hath not power over the Lunaticks Lands without a Custom Hobart p. 215 216. Cox and Darson Trespass Quare clausum fregit Copy-holder of Under-Wood without the Soil shall have Trespass Quare clausum fregit Moor n. 480. Account for Profits Account lies not for an Heir Copy-holder for the Profits of his Copy-hold Lands taken during his non-Age where the Defendant hath not entred and taken the Profits as Prochein Amy but claims by Custom and Grant of the Lord to the Use of the Assignee which Custom is good 1 Leon. p. 226. n. 356. Anonymus Faux Judgment Writ of faux Judgment lies not for a Copy-holder Vide supra Writ of Right Close Writ of Right Close lies not for a Copy-holder 4 Rep. 21. Avowry for Rent by Lessee of a Copy-holder Lessee for years of a Manor distrains a Copy-holder for Rent he Replevins Lessee Avows Per Curiam Avowry may be made for the Rent of a Copy-holder in the Kings-Bench and there is difference between an Ejectione Firmae and this Case For the Ejectione Firmae is brought for the Copy-hold it self But this Avowry is for Rent due to the Lord which is a duty at the Common Law and therefore an Avowry may well be for it Cro. El. p. 524. Laughter and Humphry A Copy-holder in Fee by Licence made a Lease for 21 years by Indenture rendring Rent Covenant by Assignee of a Reversion wherein the Lessee Covenants for himself his Executors and Assigns That he will erect a c. The Lessor surrendred to the Use of the Plaintiff and his Heirs who was admitted accordingly and the Plaintiff as Assignee brings his Action of Covenant Whether the Assignee may maintain this Action by the Common Law or by the Statute 32 H. 8. Cap. 34. was the Question for the Defendant demurred upon the Declaration it was adjourned in Cro. Car. 24. Plat and Plummer But it seems by 1 Keb. 356. Baker and Berisford's Case That the Assignee is not within this Statute to have a Covenant Action of Debt doth not lye for Arrearages of Copy Rents for the Stat. of 32 H. 8. Action of Debt for Rent does not extend to them but to Rents out of Free Land Yelv. p. 135. Appleton and Doily And so Executors shall not have Debt for Arreages of such Rents due in the Life-time of the Testator The Lord of a Manor is and Fines No Remedy for Fines Rents c. after vendition for Admittances and Copy-hold Rents are Arrear and then he sells the Manor he is without Remedy both in Law and Equity He hath deprived himself of the Remedy by his own act viz. the vendition 1 Rolls Abr. 374. Serjeant Hitcham and Finch Copy-holder for Life becomes Lunatick A. Action of Trover to be brought in the Lunaticks name he being a Copy-holder sows the Land The Lord grants the custody of the Lunatick to B. A. takes the Corn to the Use of the Lunatick B. Brought Trover in his own name it s ill brought It ought to be brought in the Lunaticks name and not in the name of the Committee Noy p. 27. Cox and Dawson Covenant by Rent Custom is when a Copy-holder dies seized of Copy-hold Lands or Rent That his Wife shall have the one moiety and his Issues the other moiety A. B. so seized takes Mary to Wife and they have Issue John A. B. dies so that Mary is seized of the moiety for her Life and John of the other moiety in Fee and of the first moiety as his Reversion Mary and John her Son make a Lease to J. B. for twenty one years rendring fifty pounds Rent to Mary and fifty pounds to John and after the death of Mary one hundred pounds to John John marries Margaret they have Issue three Sons John dies so that a fourth part comes to his Wife and the other fourth part to his three Sons Rent is behind Margaret brought Debt on Covenant for the Rent Per Curiam it was well brought by her sole Joynder in Action without joyning Mary with her Tenant in Commonn shall joyn in Action so long as the privity of Contract remains but when the privity is determined as it is here they may sever and such Contract shall ensue the nature of the Land and also there is a vesting by Custom and express several Reservations 2 Siderfin p. 9. Baker and Berisford CAP. XXX Of Copy-holders being Impleaded and Impleadable in the Lords Court Vide supra Tit. Customs COpy-hold Lands are as the Demesns of the Manor and are the Lords Freehold and therefore are not impleadable but in the Lords Court Croke Jac. 559. Pymmock and Hilder One recovered certain Copyhold Lands in the Court of the Lord of the Manor by Plaint in the nature of a Writ of Right A Precept cannot be made and awarded out of the Court to execute the said Recovery Posse Manerij and to put him who recovered into possession with the Posse Manerij for force in such cases is not justifiable but by command out of the Kings Courts 3 Leon. 99. A Woman recovered Dower of a Copy-hold within the Manor and 40 l. Damages 40 l. Damages recovered yet no Execution or remedy but by Petition and she brought Debt for the Damages in B.R. Per Cur. it lyes not because the Court Baron cannot hold Plea nor award Execution of 40 l. Damages though the Damages were there well assessed and because no Writ of Error or Faux Judgment lyes upon such a Recovery of a Copy-hold but only a Petition to the Lord of a Manor so that Copy-hold Plaints are not within the Jurisdiction of this Court of Kings-Bench Moor n. 559. Shaw and Tompson If an erroneous Judgment be given in a Copy-hold Court of a common Lord in an Action in nature of a Formedon a Bill may be exhibited in Chancery Faux Judgment how relieved in nature of a Faux Judgment to reverse this Pateshall's Case in Scaccario 1 Rolls Abr. 373. and Co. on Lit. p. 60. a. He cannot have the Kings Writ of false Judgment in respect of the baseness of the Estate and Tenure being in the Eye of the Law but a
in Case of severance and that after the Lord granted over c. as on change of a Corporation in Lutterell's Case 1 Keeble 652. Davy and Watts The Case was The King was seized of a Manor Common appendant where there were divers Copy-holders for Life and was also seized of 8 Acres of Land in another Manor in which the Copy-holders have used time out of mind c. to have Common and after the King grants the Manor to one and the 8 Acres to another and a Copy-holder puts in his Beasts into the 8 Acres And in Trespass brought against him by the Patentee of the 8 Acres he prescribes That the Lord of the Manor and all those whose Estates he hath in the Manor have used time out of mind c. for them selves and their Copy-holders to have Common in the said Acres of Land And he farther pleads That he was Copy-holder for Life by Grant after the said unity of possession in the King and so demanded Judgment si actio Against which the unity of possession was pleaded The Defendant demurs Per Cur. as this Prescription was pleaded the Common was extinct but by special pleading he might have been helped and save his Common for this was Common appendant 2 Brownl 47. Vide James and Read Tirringhams Case 4 Rep. 38. Custom was alledged Sola separalis pastura That all the customary Tenements Habuerunt habuere consuever separalem pasturam c. it was excepted to this Plea That the Copy-holders have not shewed what Estate they have in their customary Tenements And 2dly It s not alledged that they have solam pasturam for their Beasts Levant and Couchant Per Cur. it s not material for be their Estates what they will in Fee or Life or Years Custom hath annexed this sole feeding as a profit apprender to their Estates and this they claim by the Custom of the Manor and not by Prescription As to the other Exception True it is if one claim only Common appurtenant to his Land he ought to say for his Beasts Levant and Couchant for in such case he claims but part of the Herbage and the residue the Lord is to have and therefore if he put in any Beasts that are not Levant and Couchant he doth a wrong to his Lord and the Lord shall have Trespass But here the Commoners claim all the Herbage and so exclude the Lord totally and so it s no mischief to the Lord 2 Sanders 326 327. Hoskins and Robins Estovers If a Copy-holder for Life had used to have Common in the Waste of the Lord or certain Estovers in his Wood and the Lord alien the Waste and the Wood to a Stranger and after grants certain Copy-hold Lands and Houses for Lives such Grantees shall have Common and Estovers in the Lands and Woods which were aliened notwithstanding the Severance But after such severance the Copy-holder shall not plead generally Quod infra manerium praed talis habetur consuetudo for after such severance the Waste or Wood is not parcel of the Manor but he may plead That before and until such time of the severance Talis habebatur a toto tempore c. consuetudo c. and then shew the severance as in Murrel's Case where the Lord severs the Freehold and Inheritance from the Copy-hold Co. 8 Rep. Swain's Case Where a Copy-holder prescribes for Estovers in the Soil of another and he saith That all Copy-holders Ejusdem tenementi usi sunt c. where he ought to have said Ejusdem manerij c. This Prescription was adjudged void 21 Ed. 4.36 b. 63. b. Prescription Pro ligno combustibili is good 2 Brownl 330. Trees A Prescription for a Copy-holder to cut Boughs of Trees is well laid by way of a Custom 2 Brownl 329. The manner of Pleading when a Lease is to be answered which is set forth in the Avowry In Replevin B. avowed for Damage feasant and sets forth That the Lady J. was seized of such a Manor whereof the place where c. and leased the same to the Defendant for years c. The Plaintiff saith That long time before King H. 8. was seized of the said Manor and that the place where c. is parcel of the said Manor demised and demisable by Copy c. and that the said King by such an one his Steward demised and granted the said parcel unto the Ancestor of the Plaintiff whose Heir he is by Copy in Fee and upon this there was a Demurrer because by that bar to the Avowry the Lease set forth in the Avowry is not answered for the Plaintiff in bar to the Avowry ought to have concluded And so he was seized by the Custom until the Avowant pretextu of the said Term for years entred And so it was adjudged 1 Leon. p. 81. Herring and Badcock In Ejectment the Defendant pleads Ejectment That the Lessor of the Plaintiff was Copy-holder in Fee of that Land parcel of the Manor of H. which is in the Queens possession by reason of a Ward and that the Lessor surrendred to the Use of the Defendant in Fee who was admitted and that afterwards the Lessor entred upon him and expelled him and let to the Plaintiff prout in the Declaration and the Defendant re-entred as he lawfully might Lease as at Common Law and plead Lease of Copy-hold Land Custom or Licence must specially be shewed The Plaintiff dedemurs Per Cur. the Plea is naught for there is no confession and avoydance of the Lease let by the Plaintiff for the Action is brought as of a Lease of Land at Common Law and this proves that the Land was Copy-hold Land and a Copy-holder cannot make a Lease for years unless by Custom or by Licence of the Lord which ought specially to be shewed Cro. El. 728. Kensey and Richardson In Ejectione Firmae brought by the Lessee of a Copy-holder Lessee pleading a Licence how it is sufficient that the Count be general without any mention of the Licence and if the Defendant plead not Guilty then the Plaintiff ought to shew the Licence in Evidence but if the Defendant plead specially then the Plaintiff ought to plead the Licence certainly in his Replication and the time and place when it was made And if the Plaintiff replies That the Copy-holder by Licence first then had of the Lord did demise and did not shew what Estate the Lord had nor the place and time when it was made it s not good Per tot Cur. For the Licence is traversable for if the Copy-holder without Licence make a Lease for years the Lessee which enters by colour of that is a disseisor and a disseisor cannot maintain an Ejectione Firmae and the Defendant cannot plead That the Plaintiff by Licence did not demise for this is a negative pregnant also it ought to appear what Estate the Lord had for he cannot Lease for a longer time than he had in the
a descent of Inheritance at Common Law there the Defendant may plead a Feoffment made by the Ancestor absque hoc that he died seized because he may have an Estate by disseisin after the Feoffment Traverse of the descent and not of the dying seized is not good March p. 21. Anonymus Copy-hold Land was granted by the Lord of a Manor 10 May 3 Car. to the Wife of Tho. Kett and in the Replication the Defendant justifies as Bayliff to Tho. Kett the Plaintiff confesseth the Land is Copy-hold Land but that the Lord granted it 1 Jac. to N. S. in Fee who had two Daughters the Wife of the Plaintiff and the Wife of Tho. Kett and died seized and that the Lands descended to them upon which it was demurred By Berkley the Grant of the whole ought to be traversed Coparceners or confessed and avoided for the first Grant shews that the Defendant was in of all and the descent to the Wife is but for a moity Dyer 171. pl. 8. Per Cur. upon the whole matter disclosed Quaere if a Coparcener cannot distrain upon the Land of another Matter of Form damage fesant and the matter of form in the pleading ought not to be regarded by the Judges upon Statute 23 El. Cap. 5. Judgment was pro Quer. Hutton said The descent which was pleaded makes the second Grant void but by Richardson Though it be avoided yet it is not confessed Hetly p. 114. Port and Yates In Replevin the Defendant avows for damage fesant by reason of a Copy granted to him of the place where c. by the Lord of the Manor Cooper Bishop of Winchester The Plaintiff saith That before Cooper Horn was Bishop by whose death the Temporalties came into the Queens Hands and this Copy-hold during the time that the Temporalties were in the Queens Hands Escheated and the Queen granted it to the Plaintiff in Fee by force whereof he put in his Beasts If there is not confessing and avoiding there must be a Traverse and traverseth the Grant by Cooper Per. Cur. this Traverse is good and ought to be for there is not any confessing and avoiding because he doth not confess the Seisin and grant by Copy but if he had confessed That the Bishop had entred and granted it by Copy Where needs no Travers then there needed not any Traverse So where one justifies by Lease from J. S. the Plaintiff saith That J. S. enfeoffed himself it is not good without a Traverse Cro. El. p. 754. Covert's Case In Ejectment Ancient Demesn pleaded Replication That they are Copy-hold and Traverse The Defendant pleaded that the Lands were ancient Demesn and pleadable by a Writ of Right Close c. The Plaintiff shews That they were Copy-hold Lands and parcel of the Manor and entitles himself by Lease under the Copy-holder and traverseth That they were impleadable by a Writ of Right Close the Traverse is well enough taken Cro. Jac. 559. Pimmock and Helder The Avowant hath Election to Traverse any part of the Plea which goes to the end of the Action or justifies the Action Traverse the consequence In Ejectment the Defendant pleaded That the Lands were ancient Demesn and pleadable by a Writ of Right Close c. the Plaintiff shews they were Copy-hold Lands parcel of the Manor and intitles himself by Lease under the Copy-holder and traverseth that they are impleadable by a Writ of Right Close Demurrer because this Traverse that they were impleadable is but the consequence of ancient Demesn and therefore not traversable but Per Curiam that the Traverse is well enough taken Where a particular Custom is confessed in the Rejoynder he ought to Traverse the general Custom If the Plaintiff in his Rejoynder confesseth a particular Custom he ought to Traverse the general Custom alledged by the Defendant as in Replication the Defendant alledgeth a general Custom Quod quaelibet femina cooperta viro joyning with her Husband in a Surrender of Copy-hold Lands and being privately examined by the Steward that this by the Custom is a good Surrender the Plaintiff replies That there is a Custom in the Manor quod quaelibet c. who is of full Age may Surrender but the Wife who surrendred here was of full Age and doth not traverse the other Custom And Per Curiam it was ill Lit. Rep. 174. Anonymus Presidents and Forms of Pleading as to Copy-hold Estates The Form of Pleading that a Messuage is parcel of a Manor dimissibil dimiss per Copiam 1 Sanders 146. Wade and Batch That the Lands are Copy-hold Lands c. 2 Sanders 321. Pleading of a Surrender made in the Court of the Lord of the Manor to the Use of J. W. in Fee and of the Grant of the Lord to the said J. W. accordingly 1 Sanders 146. Pleading of the Surrender of a Remainder of a Copy-hold Estate to one for Life to another for Life to another in Fee and admission of them accordingly 1 Sanders 147. Pleading the Admittance of two Tenants in the Remainder for Life the Remainder in Fee 1 Sanders 147. Wade and Batch The Form of Pleading Copy-hold in Fee-simple in Tail for term of Life or Years In Fee-simple Hern p. 80. Co. Entr. 10. 647. Estate 3 Br. 463. Hern 227.607 In feod simplici Tail Life or Years Ra. Ent. 627. Co. Ent. 206. U. B. 128 157. Co. Ent. 657 123. Hern 679. Ad terminum vite vel vitarum Hern 653. Ad terminum 2 vitarum successive Hern 72. Ad terminum 1 2 vel 3 vitarum successive Hern 83 123. Simile in possessione Hern 711. Ad terminum vite vel vitarum tam in possessione quam in Reversione Co. Ent. 373 672. Ad terminum 1 vel 2 vitarum in possessione 1 vite in Reversione Hern 724. Ad Terminum 1 vite in possessione 1 vel 2 vitarum in Reversione Hern 254. Ad terminum 1 2 vel 3 vitarum in possessione vel 2 vitarum in reversione unius vite in possessione Coke Ent. p. 184 3 Br. 745. Pleading Surrender Surrender in Cur ad usum in feod Ra. Entr. 627. Co. Entr. 206. 3 Br. 465. Extra Curiam in manus 2 Tenentur ad usum in feod Co. Entr. 575 645. Usi Extra Curiam ad usum W. pur vie Remainder al Baron Feme Heires de Feme Co. Entr. 207. In manus Dom Co. Entr. 575. Per Tenant pur vie de moiety al use des Fitz Hern 255. Per 2 Tenants pur vie al intent de regrant Hern 656. Per Feme Covert secretur examinatur Co. Entr. 576. 3 Br. 465. Per Attorn secundum consuetudinem Manerij Co. Entr. 657. Per literam Attoruatur Co. Entr. 576. Presentment per l' homage de surrender extra Curiam Co. Entr. 206. Simile per tenentur jacen in extremis Co. Ent. 206. Admissio secundum sursum redditionem Co. Entr. 207 575 bis 577 645 657. Admissio heredis super