tribus assignatis suis by his death the Estate in the Copy-hold is determined Yelverton p. 16. Arnold's Case Though we have observed Surrender passeth not by implication That the passing of Estates of Copy-hold is much resembled to Devises yet an Use shall not pass in a Surrender by implication and therefore in Seagood and Hone's Case Cro. Car. 366. A Copy-hold is surrendred to the use of F. K. and J. R. Son of the said F. and of the longest liver of them both and for want of Issue of J. the Son of his Body lawfully begotten the Lands to remain to the youngest Son of M. S. Per Cur. J. had but an Estate for Life and being an Estate for Life limited by express limitation it shall not be a greater Estate by implication Of Surrender to a Use upon Use Surrender by A. to the Use of B. and his Heirs to the use of such person as A. should name by his Will Per Twisden in Leaper and Wroth's Case it is ill no Use can be raised upon an Use although it being Copy-hold it is not executed by the Statute But H. nominated by the last Will of A. had surrendred to B. the Court conceived no doubt in that Case 1 Keb. 627. Contingent Remainder Surrender is to the Use of one in Fee upon Condition to pay 100 l. to a Stranger and if he failed it should be to the Use of a Stranger in Fee The Question was whether that should be a good Limitation to the Stranger being a Fee upon a Fee Beaumont conceived it to be well enough being as an Use limited on a Feoffment but it was found specially Cro. El. 361. Paulter and Cornhil vide infra To the Use of ones Wife Is good though he which is admitted is in by him who makes the Surrender yet a man may Surrender to the Use of his Wife because the Husband doth not do this immediately to the Wife but by two means 1. By Surrender of the Husband to the Lord to the Use of the Wife And 2. By Admittance of the Lord to the Wife according to the Surrender 4 Rep. 29. Bunting and Lepingwel Where a Surrender is void for the uncertainty Averment A Copy-hold was granted to a Father and to his Son and Heirs who at the time of the Grant had but one Son it was adjudged a good Limitation to that Son Cro. Jac. 374. Cobb and Betterson But in Winkmore's Case cited there where a Copy was granted to S. the Father and to his Son and he doth not demonstrate which of his Sons shall have it it was adjudged to be a void Grant for the uncertainty he having many Sons at that time But that which is wholly uncertain no subsequent manifestation of my intention can help it as a Surrender to the Use of my Cosin or my Friend or to the Use of J. S. or J. N. Surrender to the Use of a Person not in esse And in this point Limitations of Estates are not directed according to the Rules of Law In this Estates are not directed according to Law For at Common Law if the Grantee immediate and be not in rerum natura and able to take by vertue of the Grant its void presently But though at the time of the Surrender the Grantee is not in esse or not capable of a Surrender yet if he be in esse and capable at the time of Admittance that is sufficient as a Surrender to him that shall be Heir to J. S. or to the Use of the next Child of J. S. or to the next Wife of J. S. though at the time of the Surrender J. S. had no Child Heir or Wife yet if he afterwards hath his Heir Wife or Child may come into Court and compel the Lord to admit according to the Surrender the reason of this Construction seems to be the Surrender is a thing executory and is executed by the subsequent Admittance and nothing vests in the Grantee before Admittance and therefore if at the time of the Admittance he be capable to take it s enough Co. Copy Put the Case at Common Law J. S. bargains and Sells to the Use of the next Son of J. D. and he hath no Son then but after he hath a Son before the Deed is enrolled yet this shall not be good and yet it s as an executory Grant i. e. not perfected till enrollment and nothing passeth till enrollment or vesteth in the Bargainee till then no more than by Surrender I will put this Case A Surrender is to the Use of A. B. for Life and after to the next Child that J. S. shall have A. B. forfeits his Estate J. S. having no Child at that time but afterwards he hath a Child shall this Child compel the Lord to admit him Q. for such a Remainder at Common Law would be destroyed But a Surrender to the Use of the right Heirs of J. S. he being alive is void because it cannot take effect according to the intent of the Grantor which is to be executed presently To one in 〈◊〉 mere Surrender Habend after his death to the Use of his Child then in ventre sa mere his or her Heirs and Assigns and if it dye before full Age or Marriage then to the Use of another in Fee Copy-holder dyes Infant was born but dyes before Age or Marriage this is not good he cannot make such a conditional Surrender to operate in futuro But whether the Surrender to an Infant in ventre sa mere be good hath been much much questioned Cro. Jac. 376. 1 Rolls Rep. 109 131. 2 Rolls Abr. 415 416. 2 Bulstr 274 275. Simson and Sothern Some are for it and some against it I conceive it is allowed to be good as well as a Devise to an Infant in ventre entre sa mere Surrender to the Use of J. S. for Life remainder to the Use of an Infant in ventre sa mere is good Of a Surrender to take effect in futuro A Surrender of a Copy-hold in Fee a tempore mortis is void 1 Sanders 151. Or a Surrender at a day to come is void Copy-holder in Fee Surrenders out of Court into the hands of two Tenants in Writing as follows Memorandum Such a day and year A. S. the Copy-holder Surrenders the Land c. to the Use of B. and C. c. This Surrender not to stand and be of force till after the decease of A. S. Per Cur. If this Memorandum should be good then this had been a Surrender at a day to come and consequently void and therefore the Surrender being perfect before by the first part of the Instrument this Memorandum shall not make it void but the Memorandum shall be void 2 Rolls Abr. 61. Seagood and Hone. And the Reason is given in Simpson and Southern's Case Cro. Jac. p. 376. A Copy-holder cannot Surrender an Estate to another and leave a particular Estate himself no more than a Free-holder for so
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
of one for Life who is admitted and dyeth He in Reversion he in the Reversion may enter without a new Admittance and therefore H. B. being seized of Copy-hold Land in Fee and having Issue three Sons G. H. and J. he surrenders it to the Use of his last Will and thereby devised it to his Wife for Life the Remainder to H. and the Heirs of his Body the Wife dyed after Admittance Henry dyes without Issue G. may enter and Admittance for him is not necessary 1 Leon. p. 174. Bullen and Grant If customary Lands do descend to the youngest Son by Custom and he enters and leaseth to another who takes the Profits and after is Ejected He shall have an Ejectione Firmae without any Admittance of his Lessor or Presentment that he is Heir 1 Leon. p. 100. Rumny and Eves Feme to her Free-Bench the Freehold of the Copy-hold being granted over The Custom of Free Bench was durante viduitate si tam diu casta vixerit the Wife after the death of her Husband comes into Court and challenged her Right of Free Bench and prayed to be admitted and the Steward refused and she made a Lease for one year to the Plaintiff and if he might bring an Action by reason the Woman was not admitted was the Question for it was agreed no Fine was due to the Lord. Per Cur. If the Freehold of the Copy-hold be granted over and the Husband dyes Admittance in Law there cannot be Admittance in that Case and yet she may enter And in this case she hath done all she could for Admittance and it is an Admittance in Law to an Estate created by Custom and by act of God and Law Continual Claim amounts to an Entry Hutton p. 18. Jordan and Stone In this Case after the death of the Husband the Law casts the Estate upon the Wife before Admittance and she may make a Lease for years as any other Copy-Holder may mesme Case 1 Rolls Abr. 592. Steward will not admit Cesty que use He enters and takes the Profits Lord brings Ejectment the Defendant shall plead not Guilty If a Copy-holder Surrender to a Stranger and the Steward will not admit him and the Stranger enters and occupies the Land if the Lord Lease to a Stranger to try the Title he to whom the Surrender was made although he be not admitted may well plead not Guilty and it shall be found for him against the Lord. In the Case of Arnold and George Yelv. p. 16. agreed by the four Judges Yet Quaere for how can the Stranger make a Title to the Profits without Admittance But perhaps the reason was That the Lord seemed to be particeps criminis for it may be intended he would not suffer the Steward to admit the Defendant She who hath a Widows Estate shall make a Lease before Admittance for the Law vested the Estate in her and there is no Fine due to the Lord Noy p. _____ Remington and Cole Husband enters into the Lands in right of the Wife before Admittance Entry of the Husband in Right of the Wife and Lease by him before Admittance and the Wife dyes before Admittance yet his Lease shall be good 1 Anderson 192. Ewer and Astwick in More n. 425. mesme Case If by the Entry of the Husband without Admittance of the Wife he should be Tenant by the Curtesie and resolved he shall In what Cases the Lord shall be compelled to make Admittances and how and in what not If the Lord of the Manor for the time being be Lessee for Life or Years Guardian or any that hath any particular Interest or Tenant at Will of a Manor all which are accounted in Law Domini pro tempore do take a Surrender into his hands and before Admittance the Lessee for Life dieth or the Years Interest or Custody do end or determine or the Will is determined though the Lord cometh in above the Lease for Life or years or other the particular Tenancies yet shall he be compelled to make Admittances according to the Surrender Co. Lit. 59. b. Earl of Arundel's Case Action on Case by the Surrenderor but not by Cesty que use It was resolved in Gallaway's Case 26 El. The Party that made the Surrender may have Action on the Case against the Lord for not holding his Court and admitting him to whose Use the Surrender was made but Cesty que use cannot Chancery Chancery will compel the Lord to admit a Tenant Tothil p. 65. Custom was That a Copy-holder for Life should name his Successor for Life and to compound with the Lord if he cannot compound then the Homage to assess the Fine he tenders it the Lord refuseth to admit Action on the Case lies not against the Lord and he that is nominated hath not any Interest therein but he may compel him in Chancery Cro. Jac. 368. He that hath no Interest as a Nominee shall have no Action sur Case Ford and Hoskins 1 Rolls Rep. 125 195. ibid. 2 Bulstr 236. mesme Case The Nominee hath neither jus in re nor jus ad rem he hath a nomination only which is matter meerly in Equity he hath neither damnum nor injuriam here because he hath no Interest Littera Attornatu ad sursum reddend tenmenta Custumaria sursum redditio admissio Co. Ent. 576. CAP. XVIII Of Fines Fines certain Vncertain Vpon Descent and Purchase Of Fine Excessive What Customs are good as to payment of Fines Of Fines as to Admittances to Reversions or Remainders What refusal to pay a Fine shall be a Forfeiture or not How the Lord shall recover his Fine Fines FInes due to the Lord upon Admittance are not to be paid till Admittance either upon a Surrender or Descent for Admittance is the cause of the Fine and the Parties being Admitted intitles the Lord to the Fine 4 Rep. 28. Sand's Case and Bacon's Case Though sometimes they are certain and by some Customs uncertain yet they ought to be reasonable Of Fines certain It was the Opinion of Richardson Chief Justice There is scarce a Copy-holder in England but the Fines are uncertain for saith he If the Rolls make it appear that at any time a greater and lesser sum was paid for a Fine this makes the Fine uncertain the ordinary course to search it is by Bill in Chancery Lit. Rep. 252. It was but his private Opinion for Fines are certain in great numbers of Manors And I suppose he means as to Evidence for in the Case of Allen and Abraham 2 Bulst 32. there is diversity between proof in case of Descents and Purchase The Case was this Upon not Guilty in Ejectment the matter upon the issue was about the Custom of a Copy-hold Manor whether the Copy-holders upon their Admittances have used to pay Fines uncertain at the will of the Lord or certain i. e. the value of two years Rent To prove the Fines uncertain Evidence to prove uncertainty
concessis al 2. pro vitis in reversione Co. Entr. 184. Paying Fine and renewing Leases The Custom was That the Land was demiseable for twenty one years paying the treble value of the Rent and if he dyed within the Term that the Term should be to his Heir paying a Fine certain of one years Rent and if he Assigned the Term the Assignee should have it paying for a Fine one years value of the Rent and he who had it might by the Custom renew it for twenty one years paying three years value and this was admitted to be a good Custom by the Court Croke Jac. p. 671. Page's Case To assign one to take the Profits of a Copy-holder Infant The Custom was The Lord of a Manor might assign one to take the Profits of a Copy-hold descended to an Infant during his non-Age to the use of the Assignee without rendring an account it was held to be a good Custom as a Rent granted to one and his Heirs to cease during the non-Age of every Heir and admitting the Custom were void yet an Action of Account lyes not Prochein Amy. for the Defendant hath not entred and taken the Profits as Prochein Amy in which case although he was not Prochien Amy he is chargable as Prochein Amy according to his Claim but here he claimeth by the Custom and Grant of the Lord and not in the Right of the Heir 1 Leon. p. 266. Case 357. Anonymus The Custom was The Lord to dispose the Estate when the Tenant leaves it in incertainty That if any one surrender to the use of another without expressing any Estate that the Lord may grant it in Fee to him to whose use the surrender was made it s a good Custom for he is a Chancellor in his own Court to dispose thereof when the Tenant leaves it uncertain Crok El. 392. Brown and Foster Custom in the Manor of Sedgly in Com. Staff was Lease to be void if Copy-holder dye within the year If a Copy-holder make a Lease without Licence of the Lord for one year and dyes within the term it shall be void against the Heir Per Cur. it s a good Custom for then the Lord may know his Tenant and the Tenant may have the Estate and pay his Fine It s void by the act of God but had the Custom been That if a Copy-holder within the year surrender his Copy-hold that the Lease shall be void this is an unreasonable Custom Lit. Rep. 233. Hutton 126 127. Turner and Hodges Custom To Lease without Licence That five Copy-holders without License they being seized in Fee may make any Lease for one year or many years and when they dye the term shall cease and the Heir may enter it s a good Custom Hutton p. 101. Custom To hold after the term ended That a Lessee for years may hold the Land for half an year after the term ended it s no good Custom More n. 27. Not to alien without Licence Custom That a Copy-holder shall not alien without Licence is good for it may have a lawful commencement by agreement To Lease without Licence A Custom That on payment of a years Rent the Lord should Licence to let for 99 years and if he refused the Tenant might do it without Licence adjudged a good and reasonable Custom Grove and Bridges cited in Porphyry and Legingham's Case 2 Keb. 344. For Lessee pur vie to let for another mans Life A Custom That Lessee for Life may let for another man's Life is no good Custom but the Lord may by Custom Lease the same for Life and forty years after More n. 27. To commit a forfeiture and so to bar the Intayl A Custom for a Copy-holder tenant in tayl to make a Lease for years without Licence to commit a Forfeiture on purpose to bar the Intayl and to transfer the Lands over to any other person is a good Custom and is but in the nature of a Surrender or Common Recovery 2 Saunders 422. Grantham and Coples And the Lord in such cases may not admit any other but him to whom it is appointed by the Tenant making such Forfeiture and when such Cesty que use is admitted he shall avoid all mean acts or dispositions made by the Lord as well as upon a Surrender and this though he was not admitted in the life of the Tenant so forfeiting Vide infra Tit. Intayling Copy-holders In respect of Discents The Manor of Wadhurst in Com. Sussex consisted of two sorts of Copy-hold viz. Sookland and Bondland and by several Customs in several Manors as if a man be first admitted to Sookland and afterwards to Bondland and dyes seized of both his Heir shall inherit both but if he be first admitted to Bondland and afterwards to Sookland and of them dye seized his youngest Son shall Inherit 1 Leon. p. 36. Kemp and Carter A. Seized of Copy-hold in Fee Copy-hold Burrough English in the nature of Burrough-English surrenders this into the Hands of the Lord ea intentione That he shall re-grant this to him and his Wife and to the Heirs of himself and the Lord re-grants this accordingly And there is a Custom That if any person seised in Fee of such customary Lands and dyes so seized that the Land shall descend filio juniori c. And A. having Issue three Sons and ten years after his death the youngest Son dyes in the Life of his Mother without Issue Per Jones and Crook The elder Brother shall have this as Heir to the youngest and not the middle Brother Custom not to extend to Collateral Descents for the Custom may not extend to a collateral Descent viz. to direct the Descent amongst the Brothers for this is out of the Custom and the Custom was once satisfied by Descent to the youngest and there is an end of the Custom and where Custom fails Common Law shall guide the Descent Where Custom fails Common Law guides the Descent And by this special Custom he which is youngest Son at the death of the Father shall have the Land and not he which comes to be youngest afterwards but Bramston and Berkly contra 1 Rolls Abr. 624. Reeve and Malster Vide Maxims of Copy-holds supra CAP. VI. Customs of a Manor as to Wives and Widows of Copy-holders What are good and what not As also of Tenancy per le Curtesie And where the Severance of the customary Tenants from the Manor shall not prejudice CUstom of Manors That Husbands shall be Tenant per le Curtesie and the Pleading More 171. Custom of a Manor is That the Wife shall have it during her Life and on Evidence it appears the Custom was she should have it durante viduitate this Evidence doth not maintain the Custom because it is a less Estate Cok. 4. Rep. 30. That the Wife of a Copy-holder for Life may hold it durante viduitate was agreed to be a good Custom
and so the Custom of Taunton-Dean That if a Copy-holder in Fee marries a Wife If the Wife survives she shall have the Fee if the Wife survives she shall have the Fee sic e converso agreed to be good Noy Rep. p. 2. There can be no Dower nor Tenancy by the Curtesie of the Copy-hold unless by special Custom 1 Anderson 292. Lease made before admittance A man may be Tenant by the Curtesie by Custom Though the Husband enter into the Land in the right of the Wife before admittance and the Wife dyes before admittance his Lease shall be good 1 Anderson 192. Ewer and Astwick It was admitted by the Court to be a good Custom That an Executor or Administrator shall have an year in the Land of the Copy-holder Custom that the Executor shall have an year in the Copy-hold against the Wife that claims her Free-Bench Noy p. 29. Remington and Cole If a Woman be Dowable of Copy-hold by Custom if the Husband after the marriage makes a Lease for years good by the Custom Tenant in Dower shall not avoid a Lease made by the Husband the Tenant in Dower shall not avoid it but it shall precede the Dower More n. 147. Holder and Fairly For he comes under the Custom as well as the Feme The Custom of a Manor was Quod quilibet tenens per Copiam poterit dimittere terras suas pur vie or in Fee or in Tayl Custom that the Wife Feme covert may Devise and that a Woman cooperta viro poterit devisare her Copy-hold Land to her Husband or to any other by the assent of her Husband Per Cur. The Custom is not unreasonable But because it was poterit devisare which is a word of justification and it should have been usi sunt devisare by way of excuse it was adjudged against the Plaintiff More n. 268. And so was one Welsh's Case in C. B. 41 El. 3 Leon. p. 81. Skipwith's Case The Custom was That Widows should enjoy during their Widow-hood Where the severance of the customary Tenants from the Manor shall not prejudice the Widow in her customary Estate The Lord Grants a customary Tenement of the Manor unto J. B. for Life by Copy and after conveys the whole Manor to W. who conveyed the Inheritance and Free-hold of B's Tenement for mony paid by B. to J. S. and others and their Heirs during the Life of J. B. the remainder to Ellen then Wife of J. B. the remainder to J. B. in Fee J. B. Grants his remainder in Fee to his Son and his Heirs The Son having Issue a Son dyed and then Ellen dyed J. B. marries Frances and dyes seized of his customary Estate Frances shall enter and enjoy her Widows Estate for it is clear That the customary Estate of J. B. remained as it was during his Life not extinct nor altered by the purchase of the Fee-simple which during his Life was in others not in him and then it follows by consequence That all customary Incidents to such a customary Estate remain whereof this is one which by Custom and Law grows of it self out of that Estate as a Descent should have done if J. B. had been a Copy-holder in Fee and the Freehold had been granted to another in Fee Hobart p. 181. Howard and Bartlet It is not in the power of the Lord to destroy Widows Estates By the severance Incidents to the Tenancy are not destroyed but Incidents to the Seigniory are The Law vests the Estate in a Woman that is to hold durante viduitate before admittance The Custom is That a Woman shall hold durante viduitate she shall make a Lease before admittance for in that case there is no Fine due to the Lord and the Law vests the Estate in her Noy 29. Remington and Cole Hobart 181. Vide Admittance The Lord Enfeoffs the Copy-holder this destroys Free-Bench A Custom of a Manor was found to be That if a Copy-holder in Fee dyes seized his Wife should hold it during her Life as Free-Bench the Lord Enfeoffs the Copy-holder who dyed seized Per Cur. she shall not hold her Free-Bench aliter if the Lord had enfeoffed a Stranger of that Land yet the Land remained Copy-hold and the Custom is not taken away Crok Jac. 126. Lashmer and Avery Damages recovered in Dower A Woman recovered Dower in the Lords Court and 40 l. because her Husband dyed seized and she brought Debt for the Damages in the Kings-Bench Per Cur. The Action lyes not because the Court-Baron could not hold Plea nor award Execution of 40 l. Damages although the Damages were there well assessed More n. 559. If a Feme Copy-holder holds the Land durante viduitate and then takes Husband the Lord shall have the Corn Oland's Case Vide Emblements The Widows customary Estate is due to her Divorce though there was a Divorce a mensa thoro Hobart p. 181. Howard and Bartlet Tenant of a Copy-hold for Life Whether the Widow attaint for Felony shall have her Estate of viduity in which the Custom was That the Wife should have her Widows Estate and the Husband was attaint of Felony and Executed The Question was whether she should have it Winch not without a special Custom Winch Rep. 27. Allen and Branch That the Wife shall not have her Dower The Wife to claim her Dower within a year and day except she claim it within a year and a day it s said to be a good Custom 3 Leon. p. 226. Pleadings Custom Quod Uxores habeant Tenementa custumaria durante viduitate sua Dyer 192. 3 Br. 403 476. Hern 73. Quod Uxores Tenen custumar in feodo habeant pro vita Tenementa unde viri obierunt seisita Et si viri dimiser tunc revers reddit Cok. Ent. 123. CAP. VII Custom as to Timber Woods and Vnder-Woods and what Prescription by a Copy-holder to cut Trees shall be good or not TEnant by Copy of Court Roll cannot by the Common Law take Trees for House-bote Hedge-bote and Cart-bote c. as Tenant for Life or Years may do who have an Estate certain but a Copy-holder by special Custom may do it Cro. El. p. 5. Lord Mountague against Sheppard Where a Custom was alledged to be That every Copy holder may cut down Trees at his pleasure this Custom is against Common Law Winch p. 1. If a Custom be That a Copy-holder may not cut down Trees it is good or not good with this difference If he be a Copy-holde of Inheritance such a Custom is good but if he be a Copy-holder for Life its noâ— good 1 Bulstr 150. Earl of Northumberlanâ— against Wheeler The Tenant prescribes to câ—â— and dispose all the Trees upon his Tenancy its an ill Prescription Aliter of a Copy-holde of Inheritance Noy p. 2. So it is adjudged it 1 Rolls Abr. 650. Glascock and Peche It s a good Custom Copy-holder in Fee
Inheritances at the Common Law have unless it be by Custom for though they are Estates of Inheritance according to the Custom yet they are not Estates of Inheritance simpliciter that is to have all collateral Qualities as Estates in Fee-simple have but only such which Custom hath setled and allowed 4 Rep. 22. Brown's Case And accordingly my Lord Hobart in Cox and Darsen's Case p. 215. c. saith The collateral Incidents of Estates as Dower Tenancy by the Curtesie Wardship c. are not without special Custom And therefore Copy-hold Inheritance shall not be Assets to charge the Heir in an Action of Debt upon Bond made by his Father Copy-hold Lands not Assets in the Heir tho' he has therein bound his Heirs neither shall the Wife of such customary Estate be indowed nor the Husband be Tenant by the Curtesie neither shall the descent of any such Estate toll the Entry of him that had customary Right c. But to explain this in these before-mentioned Qualities and others I shall Illustrate it by several Cases and Resolutions Dower The Wife shall have Dower of a Copy-hold by special Custom otherwise not and when she is to be endowed of a Copy-hold by the Custom then she shall have all the incidents to Dower as to recover Damages for the Profits from the death of her Husband by the Statute of Merton C. 1. De viduis 4 Rep. 30. Shaw and Tompson Tenant by the Curtesie and that without admittance of the Wife The Custom of a Manor was That if any man had a Wife who was a Copy-holder in Fee of the Manor and had Issue by her that he should be Tenant by the Curtesie of the Land A. a Copy-holder was seized and had Issue a Daughter who was married to J. S. who had Issue A. dyed his Wife entred the Wife dyed before admittance The Question was if by the Entry of the Husband without admittance of the Wife he should be Tenant by the Curtesie Per Cur. he shall the delay of the admittance of the Wife shall not prejudice the Husband being a third person More n. 425. Ever and Aston but if a Woman Copy-holder in Fee takes Husband who had Issue and the Wife dyes there the Husband shall not be Tenant by the Curtesie without special Custom 4 Rep. 22. Ryers Case Descent tolls not an Entry Discontinuance The Descent of a Copy-hold doth not toll an Entry 4 Rep. 22 23. Bullock and Dibly and 3 Rep. 9. You may see there where the Entry shall be congeable by the Issue after a Surrender or Lease by Licence of the Lord made by the Ancestor and shall not be a Discontinuance The Lord seized a Copy-hold without cause and grants it to another in Fee Grantee dyes seized and his Heir is admitted The first Copy-holder dyes his Heir enters and Surrenders to the use of a Stranger Per Cur. 1. Descent of a Copy-hold shall not take away the Entry of another Copy-holder who hath right 2. The Entry of the Heir without admission is lawful and being in his Surrender is good Cro. Jac. 36. Joyner and Lambert If one seized of Copy-hold Land in the Right of his Wife Surrender this to the use of another in Fee who is admitted accordingly the Husband dyes this is no discontinuance to the Wife nor her Heirs but the Wife may enter and not be put to her cui in vita nor her Heir to her sur cui in vita If Copy-holder for Life Surrender to the use of another in Fee this is no Forfeiture Surrender by Copy-holder for Life to one in Fee is no forfeiture for this passeth by Surrender to the Lord and not by Livery And Copy-hold Estates shall not have such qualities as Estates at Common Law have without special Custom 4 Rep. 4. Clun and Pearse and therefore where by Custom of the Manor But recovery by Pleint in a real Action shall be a discontinuance Pleints have been made in the Court of the Manor in the nature of real Actions That if a Recovery be in a Pleint in the nature of a real Action against a Tenant Copy-holder in Tayl it s adjudged that this shall be a discontinuance and shall take away the Entry of the Heir in Tayl for these Pleints in the nature of real Actions are warranted by the Custom this is an incident which the Law annexeth to the said Custom and such recovery shall be a discontinuance 4 Rep. 23. Deal and Rigden Having finished the Learning of Customs in order to the understanding of Copy-hold Estates it will be convenient to say something of the customary Tenant and of the Court and the Steward which shall be attempted briefly in the next Chapter CAP. X. The several sorts of Coph-holders and who shall be said to be customary Tenants Of Copy-hold Burrough-English Of the Court Two sorts of Courts Baron Of the Copy-holders Court. Who may keep Courts and to what purposes and where Of the Steward his Office and power of Deputation what he may do ex officio or not WE read of three kinds of Copy-holders in our Book I. Terra Nativa These were called Bond-Lands also because they held in Villenage II. Custumary And this was held by Free-Tenants III. Mensales As also Dominica because by this the Table of the Lord is maintained Some Copy-hold Land is called Poadland and some Molland a molli redditu where some small Rent was reserved There were two other manner of Copy-holds Old Aster and new Aster Aster signifies a Chimney those Copy-hold Lands which had had usually for a long time an House on them they called Old Aster Lands but those which of late had an House built on them they called New Asters And in old Records the Bastard Eigne did plead That he was Filius Askarius as much as to say Born in the House 2 Rolls Rep. 235. M. 20 Jac. B. R. Smith and Reynard Some Copy-hold Land is in the nature of Burrough-English Cro. Jac. 56. Curtis's Case Copy-hold Burrough-English And so shall descend to the youngest Son Some Copy-hold is of the nature of Burrough-English as well for the Brother as the Son Cro. Jac. 101. Whitton and Williams Between a Copy-hold in Burrough-English and a Freehold in Burrough-English there is not any difference as to descents Cro. Car. 411. Baron and Feme Copy holders for Life of Copy-hold of the nature of Burrough-English Reversion to the Husband in Fee he had Issue three Sons William George and Charles The Father dyed seized of this Reversion which descended to Charles Charles dies without Issue the Wife dyes Question was whether William Brother and Heir of Charles or George should have it Berkly and Bramston were for George because there being a Reversion expectant upon Estate for Life George shall take his Title from his Father and take by descent from him who had seisin of the Free-hold and not make mention of him who had the
Reversion expectant upon an Estate for Life In all Writs where a man conveys by discent there shall not be mention of any but those who had seisin And in all Actions and Writs where a man conveys by descent there shall not be mention of any but of those who took the Estate and had seisin and not from others who never had seisin the Law esteeming them as if there had been never any such persons and by consequence he may claim here as youngest Son by the custom as Heir in Burrough-English as if Charles had never been because he hath it in course of descent and this is true at Common Law but Jones and Croke held that William had the better Title for Charles being youngest Son at the time of the death of his Father that makes him Heir in Burrough-English by the Custom and when it rests in the youngest Son as Heir by the Custom the Inheritance is fixed in him and he only who is in esse at the time of his Fathers death shall have as by Custom this seems to be the better Opinion Crok Car. 410. Reeve and Malster Who may be said to be customary Tenants A Wife that hath her Widows Estate according to the Custom of the Manor is a good customary Tenant So Tenant per the Curtesie per the Custom In Gloucestershire there is in a Manor a Custom That Executors shall have the Profits for a year In some sense they are good customary Tenants Under-Tenant in what respect Custom was That for Waste to be amerced and to distrain for such amerciament the Beast of the under-Tenant as well as the Tenant is liable The under-Tenant is a customary Tenant to this purpose and no Stranger Transit terra cum onere he enjoys the Priviledge of a customary Tenant and he shall undergo the Charges March Rep. 161. Thorn and Tyler Note There is difference between customary Lands and Copy-hold Lands Freehold as well as Copy may be customary Lands as ancient Demesn may pass by Surrender in some Manors and by Copy and ancient Demesn may pass by Feoffment as Surrender Vide Peryman's Case Rep. Court The Nature of a Court Baron and who may keep Courts or not A Manor cannot be without a Court Baron Vide supra it is inseperably incident to a Manor without any Grant from the King to keep the same and this is not drawn from the Crown but is to be held de necessitate 1 Bulstr 6. The King and Stafferton The Court Baron must be holden within the Manor Where to be held for if it be holden without the Manor it is void unless a Lord being seized of two or three Manors hath usually time out of mind kept at one of his Manors Courts for for all the said Manors then by Custom such Courts are sufficient in Law albeit they are not holden within the several Manors Co. Lit. 58. a. There may be a customary Manor held by Copy and such a customary Lord may keep Courts and grant Copies 11 Rep. Nevil's Case Cro. Jac. 260. contra Now there are two sorts of Court Baron Two sorts of Court Baron one at Common Law incident to every Manor and is of Freeholders and the Freeholders are Judges There is also a customary Court consisting of customary Tenants for without them it cannot be and this Court may be holden without any Free Tenants or other Suitors except Copy-holders and of this Court the Lord or his Steward is Judge Co. Lit. 58. And when the Court Baron is of this double nature the Court Rolls contain matters appertaining to both Honour what An Honour consists of many Manors yet all the Courts for the Manors are distinguished and have several Copy-holders and though there is for all the Manors but one Court yet are they quasi several and distinct Courts One Court kept for many Manors and so it was usually in the time of the Abbots they kept but one Court for many Manors Cro. Car. 361. Seagood and Hone. When the Lord of a Manor having many ancient Copy-holds in a Vill grants the Inheritance of all his Copy-holds to another Customary Court how made and may be held the Grantee may hold Court for the customary Tenants and accept of Surrenders and make Admittances and Grants for although this is not a Manor in Law because there want Freeholders yet there may be holden a Court for Copy-holders and the Lord or Steward is Judge And as the other being a Court Baron may be called the Freeholders Court this may be called the Copy-holders Court so if all the Freehold do Escheat or if the Lord release the Tenure and Services of all his Free Tenants yet the Lord may hold a customary Court for his Copy-hold Tenants So if the Lord demise all his Lands granted by Copy to another for a thousand years such Lessee may hold Court for the Copy-holders 4 Rep. 26 Melwich's Case and Sir Christopher Hatton's Case cited in Neal and Jackson's Case 27. These number of Copy-holds may support a Custom but a single Copy-hold cannot hold a Court. Tenant at Will of a Copy-hold Manor may grant Copyhold Estates but cannot keep Courts Guardian in Socage keeps Courts in his own name and grants Copies its good and shall bind the Heir Vide Tit. Grants Cro. Jac. 55 98. Shopland and Rider The Lord himself may Grant or make Admittance out of the Manor at what place he pleaseth but so cannot the Steward 4 Rep. 26. Melwich's Case 27 Clifton and Mollineux Court may be held out of the Manor by Custom but by Custom the Court may be held out of the Manor and Grants and Admittances there made be good as divers Abbots Priors c. have kept one Court for many Manors Steward Every Steward of Courts is either by Deed or without Deed for a man may be retained a Steward to keep his Court Baron and Leet without Deed and that retainer shall continue till he be discharged Co. Lit. 61. b. 4 Rep. 30. And such Steward may take Surrender of customary Tenants out of the Court 4 Rep. 30. Holcroft's Case In all real Actions which concern Lands the Suitors are the Judges but in personal Actions under the Sum of forty shillings the Steward is the Judge Steward without Deed may take Surrenders out of Court but the Custom must warrant it Note Difference between a Steward of a Manor and the Steward of a Court. A difference between Steward of a Manor and the Steward of Courts Steward of a Manor may take Surrenders in any place 1 Leon. p. 227. Case 307. Blagrave and Wood. Steward appoints his Deputy to keep a Court ad tradendum Copy-hold Land to W. for Life Deputy the Deputy commands H. his Servant to keep Court and grant the said Land and the Custom found did not extend farther than the Deputy though a Deputy cannot transfer his Authority over being an office of Trust yet
therefore where Surrenderer is Infant and dyes his Heir shall enter Cro. El. 90. Knights's Case It must be an actual Surrender in Court and not a Surrender in Law If a Copy-holder in Fee take the same Land of the Lord by other Copy for Life this is not any Surrender or Determination of his Copy-hold Inheritance for a Copy-hold may not be surrendred but by actual Surrender in Court sursum reddens this into the hands of the Lord and not by Surrender in Law 1 Rolls Abr. 501. Shepard and Adams In grant of a Reversion Attornment why not needful Attornment is not necessary for a Copy-holder because there is no time when the Termor should Attorn for before the Surrender he cannot Attorn and after the Surrender and Admittance it is too late The Copy-hold Estate is like an Estate raised by Uses or Devise in which an Attornment is not necessary 1 Brownl 179. Swinnerton and Miller The Surrender and Admittance are in the nature of an Inrolment and so amount to an Attornment or at least supply the want of it 1 Leon. 297. General Rules and Maxims 1. Implication is not good in a Surrender though it be in a Will A Surrender of Copy-hold Land was to the Use of the second Son for Life after the Death of the Tenant and his Heirs it was adjudged not good 1 Brownl Rep. 127. Allen and Nash Noy 152. 2. In Copy-hold Cases a Surrender to the Use c. This is no Use properly but an Explication shewing how the Land shall go 1 Brownl 127. 3. It is the general Custom of the Realm That every Copy-holder may Surrender in Court and need not to alledge any Custom therefore so if out of Court he Surrender to the Lord himself he need not in Pleading alledge any Custom but if he Surrender out of Court into the Hands of the Lord by the Hands of two or three Copy-holders or by the Hands of the Bayliff c. or by the Hands of any other these Customs are particular and therefore he must plead them Co. Lit. 59. a. The Estate of Cesty que use shall ensue the Limitation in the Surrender and not in the Admittance of the Lord Co. Lit. 659. b. If two Joynt-Tenants be of Copy-hold Lands in Fee and the one out of Court according to the Custom surrender his part to the Lords Hands to the use of his Will and by his Will deviseth his part to a Stranger in Fee and dyes and at next Court the Surrender is presented by the Surrender and Presentment the Joynture is severed and the Devisee ought to be admitted to the moiety of the Lands for now by relation the state of the Land was bound by the Surrender and the Lord cannot grant a larger Estate than is exprest by the limitation of the Use 1 Rolâ— Rep. 438. In Grant of a Reversion Attornment is not necessary for a Copy-holder Vide supra 5. Copy-hold may not be surrendred but by actual Surrender in Court and not by a Surrender in Law Vide infra 6. A Copy-holder cannot Surrender an Estate to another and leave a particular Estate in himself no more than a Freeholder Vide apres Before I come directly to treat of Surrenders one of the most useful pieces of Learning as to Copy-hold Estates I shall premise some general Considerations as to the Alienation of Copy-hold Estates or of a Transferring of Copy-hold Interest from one to another and more particularly of the Selling and Aliening of the Copy-hold Lands of a Bankrupt the knowledge whereof is very necessary and not very common The Assurance of Copy-hold Land from one man to another who is not Lord must be made by Copy of Court Roll according to the Custom and this must be by Surrender and for the perfecting thereof must be Presentment and Admittance generally For If I would have my Estate pass according to my Will I cannot devise this Copy-hold by Will but must surrender it to the use of my last Will and in my Will I must declare my intention But for the manner of doing it and the operation in Law Vide postea sub Titulo Surrender to the Use of a mans last Will. And If I would Exchange Copy-hold Land with another I cannot do it by Deed of Exchange but we may Surrender it each to other and the Lord shall admit us accordingly But Copy-hold Estates in some Cases may pass and be transferred from one to another without Surrender and that by Release Copy-hold in some Cases may pass otherwise than by Surrender But then we must observe this difference between a Release that enures by way of extinguishment or by way of an enlargement of an Estate By Release sometimes a Copy-hold may be transferred when it enures by way of extinguishment As by Release and so may serve to drown a Copy-hold Right As for the purpose A man is admitted upon a void Presentment and where the Presentment and Admittance is not according to the Surrender as where the Presentment is absolute and the Surrender conditional and so void It was resolved that the Admmittee had a customary Estate by Possession and is in by Title and is capable of a Release from him who had the right and here is a customary Estate upon which the Release may well be grounded besides the Lord is not prejudiced he being satisfied his Fine upon the Admittance So if I am ousted of a Copy-hold and the Lord admit the Disseisor according to the Custom a Release made by me will extinguish my right But if one be disseised of a Copy-hold Estate a Release by the Disseisee to the Disseisor is void for this is a prejudice to the Lord in losing his Admittance Fine if it should be good and there is no customary Right upon which a Release should enure there never having been Admittance as was in the other Case So is Mortimer's Case Hetly p. 150. But a man cannot pass a Copy-hold Estate by way of Lease and Release because this Release enures by way of enlargement of Estate and to transfer an Interest but this must be by a Lease for a Year which is warranted c. and by Surrender of the Reversion into the hands of the Lord and he to grant it over to the Lessee One Joynt-Tenant releaseth to his Companion One Joynt-Copy holder released to his Companion and it was resolved in the Case of Wase and Pretty Winch Rep. p. 3. That the Release was good without Surrender or Admittance for the first Admittance is of them and every of them and the ability to Release was from the first Conveyance and Admittance In some Cases Copy-holds cannot pass by Surrender Release Admittance or otherwise As for the purpose The Lord grants an ancient Copy-hold to S. in Fee and after he grants the Inheritance of that Copy-hold to a Stranger in Fee S. makes his Will and demiseth it to M. which was surrendred at next Court now by the
Cesty que use surrenders to another and after at another Court he to whose Use the Surrender was surrenders the Land to the Use of another this shall enure as an Admittance upon the first Surrender and after a Surrender for by the acceptance of the Surrender he is admitted Tenant Acceptance of a Surrender 1 Rolls Abr. 505. Calchin's Case 3 Bulst 230. mesme Case If a Copy-holder surrender to the Use of another Acceptance of Rent and after the Lord having knowledge of this accepts the Rent of Cesty que use out of Court this is an Admittance in Law Rolls 1 Abr. 505. Freswel and Welch If the two Tenants into whose Hands the Surrender was pay the Rent to the Lord yet his acceptance shall not amount to an Admittance but if he had alledged the payment of the Rent and acceptance of it by the Lord as of his Copy-holder this would have amounted to a good Admittance of him 3 Bulstr 215. mesme Case Any act to imply the consent of the Lord to the Surrender What acts or words by the Lord amount to an Admittance it shall be a good Admittance the Presentment by the Homage doth not make an Admittance the acceptance by the Steward of the Presentment is no Admittance Bridgman Rep. 82. Robinson and Groves Copy-holder surrenders his Estate to the Use of J. S. who again surrenders the same to the Use of J. N. this is good vide supra Or in such case if the Lord meet J. N. and saith to him Such a Surrender is made to your Use to which I agree or am content this saying amounts to a good Admittance 3 Bulstr 230. Elken's Case 215 216. If the Steward accept a Fine as of a Copy-holder it amounts to an Admittance granted in Rawlinson and Green's Case 3 Bulstr 237. In what Cases the Admittance of one shall be the Admittance of another If a Copy-holder surrender to the Use of one for Life the Remainder to another the Admittance of Tenant for Life is Admittance for him in Remainder also for that they are but one Estate and but one Fine is due for both 4 Rep. 22 23. Fither's Case Aliter of him in Reversion More n. 488. Dell and Higden He in Remainder after a Tenant for Life who was admitted surrenders to the Use of a Stranger in the Life-time of Tenant pur vie and good Cro. Jac. 31. Auncelm's Case But such Admittance of Tenant for Life shall not prejudice the Lord of his Fee due by the Custom 4 Rep. Brown's Case 22 23. Foxton and Colston But in Hippin and Bunner's Case Popham thought only one Fine to be due upon such surrender which the Tenant for Life shall pay before his Admittance except there be especial Custom that two Fines shall be due Cro. Eliz. 504. The Admittance of Tenant for Life or Years shall be an Admission of all in Remainder Per Hales and there is no inconvenience in it for Fines are to be paid by the particular Remainder except a Fine be assessed for the whole Estate and then there is an end of the Business The Estate is bound by the Surrender and shall go to them in Remainder Mod. Rep. and 3 Keb. 29. Blackburn and Greves A Copy-holder Surrenders to the Use of several Persons for years successive the Remainder in Fee to J. S. an Admittance of a particular Tenant is an Admittance of all the Remainders to all purposes but only the Lords Fine and the Possession of Lessee for years is the Possession of him in Remainder ibid so as to make a Possessio Fratris and the Sister of the whole Blood shall have it before a Brother of the second Venter Admittance by Attorny The Lord may refuse to admit by Attorny him to whose Use a Surrender was made for that he ought to do Fealty which he cannot do by Attorny 9 Rep. 76. Comb's Case Yet if the Lord will admit him by Attorny its good ibid. A Copy-holder surrendred to the Use of his last Will and devised the Lands to his youngest Son in Fee The youngest Son being in Prison makes a Letter of Attorny to one to be admitted to the Land in the Lords Court in his room and also after Admittance to surrender the same to the Use of B. and his Heirs to whom he had sold it for the payment of his Debts by two Judges it s not a good Surrender Admittance of an Heir is good by Prochein Amy By Prochein Amy. for by such Admittance he is to do corporal Service which cannot be done but in person and yet it hath been adjudged good the Heir consenting but otherwise 2 Siderfin 37 61 Blunt and Clark 4 Rep. Brown and Clerk's Case The Case was Copy-holder surrenders to the Use of J. S. and his Heirs Proviso That if the Copy-holder pay eight hundred pounds at such a day the Surrender shall be void J. S. dyes before the day not being admitted and his Heir beyond Sea A Neighbour comes and is admitted in the name of the Heir the Heir comes back and brings Ejectment Per Cur. It s a good Admittance for a Consent subsequent is as strong as an Authority precedent in this Case and the Heir affirms his Admission And if a Surrender Per Glyn be to the Use of J. S. and J. N. is admitted and J. S. consents it s a good Admittance Admittance where to be made The Lord of the Manor may make Admittance out of the Manor also Co. Lit. 61. b. The Steward of the Manor may admit upon a Surrender out of Court as well as in Court 4 Rep. 26 27. Freswel and Welch Admittances upon Descent The diversity between Admittance upon Surrender and Admittance upon Descent lyes In Admittance upon Surrender nothing is vested in the Grantee before Admittance no more than in voluntary Grants but in Admittance upon Descents the Heir is Tenant by Copy immediately upon the death of his Ancestor The time of Admittance There is thirty years between the death of the Father Excuse and the Heirs not being admitted who made a Lease Per Cur. this is supina negligentia and shall disable his Person to make any Demise but the Lessor at the time of the death of his Ancestor was two years of age and that after his full age no Court had been holden for a long time and that at the first Court lately he prayed to be admitted and the Steward refused him And Per Cur. this is a good excuse 1 Leon. 100. Rumny and Eves If a Copy-holder dyeth When the Heir must pray to be admitted his Heir within age he is not bound to come at any Court during his non-age to pray Admission or to tender his Fine also if the death of the Ancestor is not Presented nor Proclamations made he is not at any mischief although he be of full Age ibid. What things the Heir way do or not before Admittance Upon the death of the Ancestor he may
enter upon the Land before Admittance he may take the Profits punish any Trespass done upon the Land 4 Rep. 21. Brown's Case and 23 Fitch and Huckly He may before Admittance surrender to whose Use he pleaseth paying the Lord his Fine The Lord may avow upon him before Admittance for arrears of Rents or other Services If Baron and Feme Copy-holders to them and to the Heirs of the Husband are and the Husband dyes the Heir of the Husband may surrender his Reversion into the hands of two Tenants of the Manor out of Court before any Admittance during the Life of the Wife and this is a good Surrender for the Reversion was cast upon him before any Admittance Calchin's Case 1 Rolls Abr. 499. Possessio Fratris before Admittance There shall be a possessio fratris before Admittance for if a Copy-holder in Fee have Issue a Son and a Daughter by one Venter and a Son by another Venter What makes a Possession or not for that purpose and his Son by the first Venter enter into the Land and dyeth before Admittance the Daughter shall Inherit as Heir to her Brother and not the Son by the second Venter as Heir to his Father And sometimes the Possession of a Termor without any actual Entry or Claim made by the Heir will make a possessio fratris as if the Copy-holder by Licence of the Lord maketh a Lease for years and dyeth and the Son of the first Venter dyeth before the expiration of the Term being neither admitted nor having made any actual Entry or Claim yet this Possession of the Lessee is sufficient and the Reversion shall descend to the Daughter of the first Venter and not to the Son of the second Venter but if the Lease had determined the Son living by the first Venter and afterwards he had dyed before any actual Entry made the Law would have fallen out otherwise because there was a time when he might have lawfully entred The same Law was as to the possession of a Guardian Heir before Admittance is not a compleat Tenant to all purposes But yet the Heir before Admittance is not a compleat Tenant to all intents and purposes for before that he cannot be sworn of the Homage and he cannot maintain a Pleint in the nature of an Assise in the Lords Court till he is admitted Co. Cop. As there may be possessio fratris c. before the Heirs Admittance so there may be a Tenant by the Curtesie Dyer f. 292. before Admittance of the Feme More n. 425. By Hales in the Case of Blackburn and Greaves Modern Rep. 120. If a Surrender be to the Use of A. for Life the Remainder to his eldest Son c. or to the Use of A. and his Heirs and then A. dyes the Estate is in the Son without Admittance whether he takes by Purchase or Descent One seized of a Copy-hold Tenement in right of his Wife in his Demesn as of Fee surrenders this Copy-hold Tenement without his Wife to the Use of a Stranger in Fee who was admitted by the Lord accordingly Husband dyes and Wife dyes the Heir of the Wife without Admittance enters on the Stranger and made a Lease and good Popham 39. Bullock and Dibler This is no such discontinuance against the Heir as to put the Heir to a Plaint in the nature of a cui in vita it s no more than a Grant which passeth no more than his own Estate and the Heir may intermeddle with the Possession before Admittance Upon a Custom to surrender to two Copy-holders out of Court Surrender to the Heir as a Copy-hold Tenant is good before Admittance Heir may enter and have Trespass before Admittance a Surrender to the Heir of a Copy-holder before Admittance is good 1 Keb. 25. Munifas and Baker Copy-holder dyes the Lord admits a Stranger the Heir may enter and upon re-entry maintain a Trespass without Admittance Noy p. 172. Simpson and Gillion He shall have Trespass and this before his Admittance upon Descent 2 H. 4.12 Pl. 49. 4 Rep. 23. b. Cro. El. 349. Berry and Green When the Heir shall be in by Purchase and not by descent If a Copy-holder of Inheritance surrender this to the Use of another and his Heirs and he to whom the Surrender is made dyes before Admittance and after the Lord admits his Heir he shall be in by Purchase and not by Descent for he is in by the Lord for nothing was in his Father by the Surrender before Admittance 1 Rolls Abr. 827. More 's Case Where there needs no Admittance In the Cases of the Heir per Descent Vide supra When one comes in as of an old Estate A. surrenders Copy-hold into the hands of the Lord and the Lord de novo re-grants the same to A. for Life and afterwards to J. his Wife during the non-age of the Son and Heir of A. and after to the Son and Heir in Tayl. A. dyes the Child being 5 years old Now the Wife is to have the said Lands for 16 years by force of the said Surrender and Admittance The Wife took another Husband and dyed Per Cur. The Husband shall have the Land during the non-age of the Infant and that without any Admittance for that he is not in of any new Estate but in the Estate of his Wife as Assignee 3 Leon. p. 9. Dedicot's Case If a Copy-holder be for years and maketh his Executors Executors and dyeth the Executors shall have the Term without any Admittance Sed Quaere for Weston in this point was against Dyer and Brown Joynt-Tenants Release One Joynt-Copy-holder released to his Companion and it was resolved That the Release was good without Surrender or Admittance for the first Admittance is of them and every of them and the ability to Release was from the first Conveyance and Admittance Winch p. 3. Wase and Pretty In what Cases and to what purposes the Copy-hold Estate shall be in the Tenant before Admittance and to what purposes not and what Leases made by them shall be good Upon Surrender nothing is vested in the Grantee before Admittance Vide supra The Copy-holder upon Surrender if the Lord refuse to admit him He who makes the Surrender continues in possession till Admittance cannot enter without Admittance nor have an Action unless there be a special Custom to warrant it for he who makes the Surrender continues in possession till Admittance and not the Lord or Cesty que use and he shall have Trespass against any that enters Cro. El. 349. Berry and Green If by the Custom of the Manor the Copy-hold ought to descend to the youngest Son and the Copy-holder in Fee surrender this to the Use of himself and his Heirs and dyes before any Admittance upon the Surrender and the youngest Son first enters the eldest may not justifie his entrance upon him before Admittance 1 Rolls Abr. 502. If a Copy-holder surrendreth to the Use
commits a Forfeiture he in the Remainder shall not enter but the Lord because the Remainder is to commence in possession after the death of the Lessee by the Custom Where the Lord shall take advantage before Presentment or not Presentment where material or not Presentment is not of necessity but for the Lords better Instruction of the Title and he may if he will take advantage of the Forfeiture before Presentment Cro. El. p. 499. in East and Harding's Case And therefore the distinction of Coke's Copy-holder is frivolous except the Custom is so though as for those Offences which by common presumption the Lord himself cannot have notice without notice given are usually presented as if a Copy-holder commit Felony or Treason or be Outlawed or excommunicate a Presentment seems necessary that the Lord may have the profits of his Copy-hold Land So if a Copy-holder alien by Deed or do a thing notorious as cutting down and selling of Trees of the Copy-hold Land by the Tenant it s not material whether it be presented by the homage or not 3 Keb. 641. Pascal and Wood's Case The presentment is to give notice to the Lord and not to intitle him and he may take notice if he will Lach. p. 227. Where and in what Cases the Forfeiture of one Copy-hold is the Forfeiture of another and where and in what Cases not as to Estate or persons Divers Copy-holds were granted by one Copy and several Habendums and several Reddendums for every of them What Forfeiture of part shall be of the whole or not and they all began at one time and were to end at one time the Copy-holder commits waste in one of the Copy-holds The Question was Whether that should be a Forfeiture of them all Per Cur. they are as several Grants and several Copies and the Forfeiture of the one is not the Forfeiture of the other Cro. El. p. 353. Tavernor and Cromwel 24 Rep. 14. mesme Case It s not material if the Copy-hold be in one or several Copies but if the Tenure be one or several If a Copy-holder make a Feoffment of one Acre of Land parcel of his Copy-hold all the Copy-hold is not forfeited by this but only this Acre p. 41. El. B. R. Fuller and Terry But if a Copy-holder cuts down a Tree which grows upon one Acre of Land parcel of his Copy-hold this is a Forfeiture of all his Copy-hold for that the Trees are to be employed in Buildings and Reparation of the Houses and Copy-hold and therefore by the making of waste all the Copy-hold is empaired So 3 Keb. 641. Pascal and Wood. If divers Copy-holds Escheat to the Lord and he re-grants them to another Tenendum per Antiqua Servitia c. they shall be severally held as they were before the Escheat 4 Rep. 27. And the Fines shall be several as Hubart and Hamond's Case 4 Rep. 28. and consequently the Forfeitures Tenant for Life Where the Forfeiture of one person shall be the Forfeiture of another persons Estate and where not Remainder in Fee of a Copy-hold Tenant for Life commits a Forfeiture by waste and the Lord enters this shall not bind him in Remainder Trin. 39 El. B. R Rastal and Turner But the Lord shall hold it during the Life of Tenant for Life So Custom is upon Surrender made to one and his Heirs if three Proclamations pass and he doth not come in to be Admitted that the Estate shall be forfeit Remainder not forfeit by the act of Tenant for Life Surrender is made to A. for Life the Remainder to B. in Fee A. comes not in this shall not forfeit the Remainder Yel p. 1. Baspool and Lond. For the Estates of A. and B. are divided Estates and the Custom shall be intended of an entire Fee-simple given to one person and the Custom being to bar an Estate shall be taken strictly It is made a Quaery in that Case of Yelverton If such a Surrender be made to A. and B. and their Heirs and A. comes within the time of the Proclamations and B. not if A. shall have all or that a moiety shall be forfeit I conceive a moiety shall be forfeit to the Lord as being Joynt-Tenants But Quaere farther of Co-partners in such case who are but one Heir Cro. El. 879. mesme Case Lessee forfeits his own Estate and not the Estate of his Copy-holder If a Copy-holder let for years by Licence of the Lord and after the Lessee makes a Feoffment this shall forfeit only his Estate and not the Estate of the Copy-holder 1 Rolls Abr. 509. White and Hunt If a Woman Copy-holder takes Husband and the Husband makes a Lease for years although the Lord enters for the Forfeiture yet after the death of the Husband this is no Forfeiture to the Wife but that she may well enter Where the Wife shall suffer for the Forfeiture of her Husband or not for this act was a wrong to the Wife as well as to the Lord and where it is a wrong to the Wife there is no reason it should be a Forfeiture 1 Rolls Abr. 509. Cro. Car. 7. Savern and Smith's Case But if the Husband seized of a Copy-hold in right of the Wife do waste this Forfeiture shall bind the Wife after the death of the Husband for this act was not any wrong to the Wife but lawful as to her and only a wrong to the Lord 4 Rep. 27. Note the difference Copy-hold is demised to two for Life successive Cutting of Trees by Tenant pur vit is a Forfeiture of the Remainder for Life where the Custom is they may not cut Trees the first Tenant cuts it s a Forfeiture of him in Remainder as well as of his own Estate if a Stranger cuts Trees or another who occupies at their sufferance this is a Forfeiture of the Copy-hold Moor 149. but Quaery of the last What is a dispensation of a Forfeiture or what acceptance or act shall purge a Forfeiture or not The admittance of an Heir of a Copy-holder by a Dominus pro tempore Admittance is a dispensation with a precedent Forfeiture 1 Keb. 26. Muniface and Baker Admission by the Lord dispenseth with a former Forfeiture Tothil 107. Clerk and Wentworth Aliter had the Lord seized an Herriot And yet if the Father commits a Ferfeiture and dyeth and the Son is admitted as Heir by descent this purgeth not the Forfeiture because the Father dying seized of no Estate the Son cannot be admitted to any Tothil p. 107. If the Tenant be amerced Amerciament the amerciament dispenseth with the Forfeiture though the amerciament be not estreated or levied 1 Leon. 104. Sir John Braunches's Case If a man comes into a Copy-hold tortiously Disseisor is admitted by the Lord and he makes a Lease not warranted a Release from the Disseisee purgeth and is admitted by the Lord and afterwards he makes a Lease for three Lives which is a Forfeiture
Rent one of the Cesty que vies dies The Question was whether the Harriot belongs to the Bishop or to W. Per Cur. 1. The Rent issues out of the intire Manor 2. That the Harriot reserved shall go with the Reversion Winch p. 46 57. Bishop of Gloucester against Wood. Pleadings What shall be a good Avowry or Conizance for an Harriot in Replevin or a good Justification in Trespass or not and how to be pleaded If the Lord avow generally for an Harriot without shewing what the Harriot should be whether Beast or other thing its sufficient Hobart p. 176. Shaw and Taylor Exception to an Avowry was for that in it he sets forth That if any Tenant dye seized the Lord is to have an Harriot and shews not of what Estate he should dye seized for in one case it may be an Harriot Custom may be due in another case an Harriot Service But Per Curiam it shews he took them nomine Heriotorum which is good enough 1 Bulstr 101. Sylliard's Case Defendant saith That all the Tenants for Term of Life c. after their deaths have used to pay to him an Harriot the Avowry is insufficient That Tenants should pay after their deaths its repugnant But if he had said That he and all those whose Estate he hath c. have had an Harriot it had been good this is Harriot Custom for Harriot Service is of Tenants in Fee 21 H. 7.13 15. 8 H. 7.10 Avowry by Harriot Service he need not shew what was the Beast he demanded nor the kind or price thereof Cro. Car. 260. Mayor and Brandwood Bar to the Avowry nulla habuit Animalia Quaere Hobart 176. Avowry for three Oxon Separatim pro separalibus Harriot ' Cust tunc 3 Br. 313 333. Prescription for Harriot sur Alienation 8 H. 7.10 Avowry for Harriot Custom hors son Fee is no Plea Vide supra Bend. p. 18. for Harriot Service hors son Fee is a good Plea Up. B. 110. Plowd 96. a. Avowry and Distress for Harriot Service bar by Harriot Custom Plowd 94. Woodland and Mantel Bar for Harriot reserved upon a Demise Tomps f. 257. Custom Pleaded Quod Dominus habeat Harriot Custumar post mortem cujusllibet tenentis Co. Entr. 39.3 Brownl 313 403. Simile si fuerint elongat tunc optimum animal levan cuban super terras Co. Ent. 666. Dier 199. Moor 16. Traverse Traverse tenure by Services alledged Co. Lit. 598 599. Traverse le seisin Quod Pater non fuit seisitus Coke Ent. 613. Plowd 94 95. Traverse le tenure protestando quod non fuit seisitus pro placito dicit quod non tenet c. 3 Brownl 329 349 313. Traverse del Custome 3 Brownl 313. Justification in Trespass Bar. quod Defend Dom. manerij habuit Harriot custom de omnibus tenentibus alienan sine Licentia Ra. Ent. 650. Up. B. 182. Bar by Harriot Custom Post mortem tenentis Co. Ent. 39. The like after the death of Tenant pur vie 3 Brownl 402. Repl. quoad 1 mes hors son fee quoad 2 Mes non est talis consuetudo Up. B. 222. Harriot pleaded in Bar al Trespass 1 Brown 383. 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 HOW the Statute De donis extends to Copy-hold Lands or not Vide sub Tit. West 2. c. De donis Of Copy-holds Intayled It is expresly provided 1 R. 3. c. 4. Of Juries That a Copy-holder having Copy-hold Land to the yearly value of 26 s. 6 d. above all Charges may be impannelled upon a Jury as well as he that hath 20 s. Free-hold But now this is altered by latter Statutes Copy-hold Lands are within the words and intention of the Statute 4 Hen. 7.24 4 H. 7. c. â—4 Of Fines and non-Claim of Fines with Proclamations and five years non-claim and shall be barred as a Lessee for years and his Lessor shall be barred so the Copy-holder and his Lord Covin But if a Copy-holder by assent and covin to bar the Lord of his Inheritance makes a Feoffment and levies a Fine with Proclamations such Fine shall not bar the Lord no more than it shall the Lessor if it be levied by Lessee for the reason in Fermor's Case 3 Rep. f. 77. If a Copy-holder for Life or in Fee be ousted and the Lord be disseised Disseisin and the Disseisor levy a Fine with Proclamations and five years pass as well the Lord as the Copy-holder is barred and the Lord shall not in such case have five years after the death of Tenant pur vie for the Lord may presently have remedy by Action viz. Assise c. and recover the Land and the Lord may without consent or commandment precedent or assent subsequent enter in the name of the Tenant by Copy and his own Right to save their particular Interests as his own Freehold and Inheritance for the Lord is no Stranger but is privy in Estate But not if a Stranger who hath no Right enter c. 9 Rep. 105 106. Margaret Podgers Case The Case was A Copy-hold is granted to A. B. and C. for their Lives suecessive the Lord by Deed Inrolled bargains the Copy-hold to A. in Fee and levies a Fine to him with Proclamations A. dies seized this discends to M. his Son and Heir who levies a Fine to Uses Fine when it shall bar or not after ten years B. enters the Fine is no bar for no Fine or Warranty shall bar any Estate in Possession Reversion or Remainder which is not devested and put to a Right and the Lords Bargain and Sale doth not devest the Estates of them in Remainder for the Lord doth that which he may do by Law and A. was in by force of the Statute of 27 H. 8. And an Act of Parliament shall do no wrong Bicknal and Tucker's Case Trin. 9 Jac. Rot. 3648. was Whether a Fine with five years will bind the Copy-holder in Remainder There was a Copy-hold granted to three for Lives to have and to hold successively the first accepts a Bargain and Sale of the Freehold Whether a Fine and non-Claim shall bar a Copy-holder in Remainder by the Lord of the Manor and then he levied a Fine with Proclamations and five years pass Whether he in Remainder is barred or not Those whose Estates are turned to Rights either present or future are meant by the Statute to be barred If a Copy-holder for years be put out of Possession and a Fine levied and no entry by him he is barred by the Statute By the Bargain and Sale he in Remainder is not put out of Possession If a man makes a Lease to begin at Easter next and before Easter a Fine is levied and five years pass this Fine will not bar because at the levying of the Fine he could not enter for then his his Right was future If the
Lord shall have one Action and the Copy-holder another and each one shall recover Damages according to his Interest Vide Leon. 1. 272. Copy-holder dyes Lord admits a Stranger the Heir may enter and upon a re-entry maintain Trespass without Admittance Noy p. 172. Simpson and Gillion Vide Admittance For non-Admittance no Action by Surrendree Action on the Case against the Lord lyes not for non-Admittance A Copy-holder in the Eye of the Law is but Tenant at the Lords Will and if the Lord will not hold Court he hath no remedy to compel him but by order in Chancery Cro. Jac. p. 368. Ford and Hoskins No Action on the Case by a named Successor By Surrendror Surrendror may have an Action on the Case for not admitting but not the Surrendree 2 Keb. 357. Quaere Remedy in faux Judgment The Demandant in a Pleint in nature of a real Action recovereth the Land erroneously with remedy for the party grieved for he cannot have the Kings Writ of faux Judgment in respect of the baseness of the Estate and Tenure being in the Eye of the Law but a Tenant at Will and the Freehold being in another yet he shall have Petition to the Lord in nature of a Writ of faux Judgment and therein assign Errors and have remedy according to Law Co. Lit. 60. And if there be cause the Judgment may be reversed Assise Tenant by Copy shall not have Assise against his Lord as Tenant in ancient Demesn shall have because he hath no Frank-Tenement 4 Rep. 21. but he shall be relieved in Equity Tothil p. 108. The Copy-holders Actions and Remedies against Strangers and where A man grants all the Coals and Coal-Mines within a Manor and parcel was Copy-hold for Life to J. S. Where Copy-holder shall have Trover for Coals digged out of his Copy-hold Land Lessee enters into the Copy-hold and digs a new Pit in the Copy-hold Land during the Life of the Copy-holder and takes the Coals and converts them c. And Lessee of the Coal-Mine brought Trover against the Lessor Per Curiam he may do it for when the Lessor or Lessee of the Coals or a Stranger enters and digs the Coals out of the Pits these belong to the Lessee and if any one else take the Coals he shall have Trover Jones Rep. 243. Player and Roberts Lessee of a Copy-holder for a year Ejectment shall maintain an Ejectione Firmae for in as much as his Term is warranted by Law by force of the general Custom of the Realm it is but reason if he be ejected that he shall have Ejectione Firmae and it is a speedy course for a Copy-holder to have the possession of the Land against a Stranger 4 Rep. 26. As to the Declaration in Ejectment Vide Tit. Declaration In Cro. El. p. 224. It is said to be adjudged Ejectment Per tot Cur. That an Ejectione Firmae doth not lye of a Copy-hold Estate But it was agreed That an Ejectione Firmae doth lye of a Lease made by a Copy-holder but not of a Demise made by the Lord of a Copy-hold by Copy of Court Roll Cole and Wall 's Case A Copy-holder had Licence from his Lord to let his Land for 21 years he lets it to the Plaintiff for three years who entred and being Ejected brought Ejectione Firmae Ejectment by Lessee upon a Lease not warranted good against a Stranger Per Cur. he may maintain this Action at Common Law for it is a good Lease between the Paâ—â—â—s and against all others but the Lord and as this Case is it is good against him because it is done by his Licence and it is a good Lease and well warranted by the Licence Cro. El. 535. Goodwin and Longhurst A Copy-holder made a Lease for one year excepting one day which was warranted by the Custom Lessee being ousted by a Stranger brings Ejectione Firmae it well lyes and if there were not any Custom yet it shall be good against all but him who had the Inheritance and Freehold So if a Lessee for Will at the Common Law had made a Lease for years for the Tenant at Will is only a Disseisor and the Lease is good against him Cro. Trin. 41 El. p. 676. Spark's Case So 717. Erish's Case Moor n. 709. Stoner and Gibson Ejectment by the Heir without Admittance to presentment If customary Lands do descend to the younger Son by Custom and he enters and leaseth to another who takes the Profits and after is Ejected he shall have an Ejectione Firmae without any Admittance of his Lessor or Presentment that he is Heir 1 Leon. p. 100. Rumny and Eves n. 128. If a Copy-holder had Common by Prescription in the Waste of the Lord and the Lord stores the Waste with Conies every Copy-holder may have Action on the Case against the Lord averring That by this the Common is impaired 1 Rolls Abr. 106. Clayton and Sir Jerom Horsey Trespass for Beasts depasturing his Common by every Commoner Copy-holder prescribes to have Common in the Waste of the Lord and brings Trespass on the Case against a Stranger for his Beasts depasturing on the Common there The Question was whether this Action lyes for 15 H. 7.12 it s agreed a Commoner cannot maintain an Action of Trespass nor no other but the Owner of the Soyl 12 H. 8.2 And the Commoner hath no right till he hath taken it by the mouth of his Beasts and the Damage is to the Tenant of the Land and then every other Commoner may have Action of Trespass and so the Stranger shall be infinitely punishable Per Coke If a Commoner may distrain Damage feasant doing Damage which proves lie hath wrong then by the same reason if the Beasts are gone before his coming he may have Action on the Case otherwise one that hath many Beasts may destroy the Common in a night And it s not like a Nusance for that is Publick and may be punished in a Leet But the other is private to the Commoners and cannot be punished in another course he cited one Whitehand's Case Many Copy-holders prescribe to have the Loppings and Toppings of Pollards the Lord cuts them every Copy-holder may have his Action and also Hill 5. Jac. Rot. 1427. Geo. England's Case and Warburton of the same Opinion 2 Brownl p. 146. Crogate and Morris If a Copy-holder by the Custom of a Manor had used to have Common for all his Beasts Action on the Case for digging Turffs on the Common Levant and Couchant upon his customary Tenements in a certain parcel of the Manor and a Stranger digs Turffs there and takes them away by which his Common is impaired Action on the Case lyes declaring That the Defendant digged so many Turffs there and then with his Horses and Carts Herbam tunc ibid crescen ' predict ambulando conculcando Declaration from the place aforesaid minus rite ceperit abcarriavit
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
Copy-holders Fines Forfeitures Surrenders Admittances Trusts c. and what is proper to be brought and examined in that Court Alteration of a Custom by consent of Lord and Tenants allowed in Chancery Custom altered and decreed accordingly Dyer contra Dyer 10 July 44 El. If any particular Copy-holders complain in Chancery of the grievousness of a Fine Outragious Fines as to particular Copy-holders relieved but not upon a Petition by all the Copy-holders where the Fine is arbitrable at the will of the Lord if such Fine be outragious my Lord will mitigate it and lessen it according to the time But if the whole company of Copy-holders do exhibit a Bill praying a mitigation of their unreasonable Fines where they are arbitrable at the will of the Lord in this Case my Lord will reject the Bill for said he I can make no Act of Parliament for them 24 Nov. 44 Eliz. The Defendant being Lord of a Manor had 150 l. as a Fine upon the Plaintiffs admission to the Lands in question The Court of Chancery directed to an Issue whether the 150 l. were a reasonable Fine or not and the Defendant got a Verdict and the Damages were given by the Jury being to the Value This Court declared Reasonableness of a Fine how to be determined and properly recovered That the Fine was proper to be recovered at Law and that the reasonableness or unreasonableness of a Fine to be paid by a Copy-holder is a question of Law and not to be determined by a Jury Hill contra Jacobs 3 Jac. 2. f. 2. One improved years value decreed to be a moderate Fine In the case of Popham and Lancastar 12 Car. 1. The Court seeing there hath been a variation of the Fines and not certain decreed That one improved years value is a moderate Fine between Lord and Tenant so was Middleton and Jackson's Case 5 Car. 1. Forfeitures wilful not relieved In the Case of Ackland Pope and my Lady Wentworth the Lord Chancellor said he would not relieve any Copy-holder who through wilful Forfeiture hath given cause of seizure to the Lord for he said The Lord had as good a right to a seizure for a Forfeiture as a Copy-holder to his Copy-hold Estate but a wilful Forfeiture he would not relieve but for negligence he might Copyholder conceals the Land of the Lord. If a Copy-holder conceal the Land of the Copy-hold to the disherison of the Lord and say to the Lord Lay out of my Land and I will pay you your Rent for it My Lord Chancellor Elsemere said He is worthy to return to his ancient villainous Tenure again Commons for Copy-holders Commons for Copy-holders and Terminors to be relieved in Chancery Tothil 108. Colcot and Lee. A Copy-holder can have no assise of Common against his Lord Copy-holder can have no Assise against his Lord but relievable in Equity Copy-holder to sue at Law sans forfeiture but is to be relieved in Equity The Tenants of Petsworth and the Earl of Northumberlands Case Tothil 108. The Court will compel the Lord to admit a Tenant Copy-holder to sue at Law without any forfeiture of his Copy-hold Tothil 65. Tenant by Copy shall not have Assise against his Lord because he hath a Frank-tenement 4 Rep. 21. but he shall be relieved in Equity Tothil p. 108. A Suit was to compel a Lord to Grant a Licence to let a Copy-hold Licence Forfeiture to be examined before a Licence be decreed but because the Defendant said in his Answer That the Copy-hold was forfeited the Court would not enforce him to grant a Licence till the forfeiture was examined Tothil 107 108. A Court of Equity shall compel a Lord to admit a Copy-holder Admittances for before Admittance he cannot have an Action upon Surrender and he hath no remedy at Common Law Hetly Rep. p. 2. A Bill in Chancery to admit a Copy-holder against Lord and Steward Plaintiff admitted to try a Title upon a Mortgage and this was only to try a Title to enable a Mortgagee to try a Custom That if mony be paid after the day so it be before Entry of the Surrender made by Mortgagee that its a sufficient Redemptition and also where the Wife Inheretrix dies sans Issue the Husband shall have the Fee at Taunton Dean Per Cur. the Plaintiff shall be admitted though the Steward need not have been made one of the Defendants 2 Keb. 357. Towel versus Cornish * Chancery will design the Bounds of a Copy-hold but not whether parcel or not parcel If a Copy-holder removes or defaceth the bounds of a Copy-hold it is proper for such a Court to design them but parcel or not parcel of a Copy-hold belongs to the Common Law to try Hetly p. 2. Blackhal and Thursby Possession after 43 years Lyford contra Coward 35 Car. 2. Richard Lyford Senior the Plaintiffs Father being seized in Fee of Freehold and Copy-hold Lands and having had Issue Richard Thomas and John now Plaintiff by Will gave the Plaintiff all his Copy-hold Lands and to his Heirs Males and for default of such Issue to his Heirs general and made a Surrender to the Use of his Will That the Surrender was presented and the Plaintiff admited Tenant and hath ever since been of the Homage and enjoyed the Copy-hold Lands That Richard the Son died 1637. leaving only one Daughter the Defendant Mary That the Court Rolls are lost and the Defendant insists That he in right of his Wife the Defendant Mary as Heir at Law to the said Richard Lyford Senior is entitled to the Premises there being no such Surrender or Admittance to be found and that no such Will was made or any thing that will make out the Defendants Title The Court declared they would see Presidents but then declared That after 43 years possession they thought it hard that the Plaintiff should be evicted and Ordered That the Defendant should admit of a Surrender and Admittance upon payment of Costs and bring an Ejectment and the Plaintiff not to insist on his possession to hinder the Tryal The Court Decreed to the Plaintiff and his Heirs to enjoy the Land according to the said Will and Custom of the Manor Relief as to Surrenders Purchases Agreements Trusts Rolls lost and Rents Arrear It is Decreed in the Case of Greenwood cont Hare 18 Car. 2. That where one was a Copy-holder for the Lives of himself and his two Sons and he paid the Fine Defendant decreed to surrender according to an Agreement and afterwards covenanted and agreed with the Plaintiffs Father to Surrender his Title and Interest in the Premisses to the Plaintiffs Father and his Heirs Copy-holder dies before any Surrender The Plaintiffs Father dyes he Exhibits his Bill to have the Premisses surrendred according to the Agreement the Purchase-mony having been paid by the Plaintiffs Father The Court considering That by the Custom the Defendants Father could have
surrendred all the three Lives and though it was not a Copy-hold in Fee yet it was decreed That the Agreement should be performed and that the Defendant do Surrender to the Plaintiffs Use and an Injunction for quiet enjoyment A Woman Copy-holder for Life took an Husband and the Reversion of the said Copy-hold was granted to three viz. A. B. C. cum acciderit by Surrender or Forfeiture for their Lives successive according to the Custom The Husband doth Surrender to the Use of A. for Life to whom the Lord doth grant a Copy accordingly A. and B. dye and the Opinion of the Court was That C. hath no right to be admitted by the Law nor in Conscience for that after the death of the Husband the Wife may enter and have a Plaint in nature of a Cui in vita contradicere non potest and during the Husbands Life the Lord may have it in the nature of an Occupancy But the Case did proceed farther viz. That the Husband and Wife were willing to release all the Right of the Wife to the surviving Reversioner The Lord Decreed to hold a Court. and the Lord would not receive it nor hold a Court But it was decreed That the Lord should hold his Court and accept their Conveyance or else avoid the Possession thereof Dyer 246. a. Copy-hold Estate in some cases not to be passed but by Decree Where the Lord grants the Reversion of the Copy-holds the Tenant cannot Surrender there being no Dominus servitiorum as the Custom will warrant and he cannot pass his Estate any way but by a Decree in Chancery and this will bind the person only 4 Rep. p. 25. in Murrel's Case vide supra Fines and Rents arrear not relieved after Sale of the Manor Copy-hold Tenant in Fee surrenders to the Use of one for Life Remainder to B. in Fee Tenant for Life dies and B. pays no Fine for his Admittance but after dies and this descends to his Son and after his Son surrenders to the Use of J. S. in Fee and no Fine paid for it and also the Rents for divers years are behind and after the Lord grants the Manor in Fee to J. B. and after sues in a Court of Equity for the Fines and Rents due before the Sale of the Manor and alledgeth in his Bill That the Copy-holder had Free Land intermixed with the Copy-hold Land so that he could not know where to Distrain for it yet he shall not be relieved in Equity for this for it is against a Maxim in Law for as much as by his own Act he had destroyed his Remedy P. 10 Car. B. R. Serjeant Hicham Plaintiff and Finch and Block Defendants and a Prohibition was granted to the Court of Requests where the Suit was Gold versus Dore Martis 23. Oct. 2 Jac. The Plaintiff delivered to the Defendant an 100 l. to buy a Copy-hold in the Defendants Name but to the Plaintiffs Use because there were differences between the Lord of the Manor and the Plaintiff so as the Plaintiff had no hopes to prevail for himself and when the Copy-hold should be obtained then the Trust was That the Defendant should Surrender the same to the Use of the Plaintiff The Defendant accordingly bought the Copy-hold Trustee refusing to surrender according to his Trust not relieved and took it in his own name and his Childrens but afterwards would not surrender it to the Use of the Plaintiff notwithstanding the same was bought with the Plaintiffs mony for this the Plaintiff Exhibited his Bill in Chancery and this appearing to be the true state of the Case my Lord would not relieve the Plaintiff because he said he would never ground a Decree upon a Lye a Falsity it appearing to him that this packing was used to thrust a Tenant upon the Lord whom he liked not and so dismist the Cause Tracy versus Noel M. 2 Jac. Copy-holder in Fee takes a Lease the Manor is sold Copy-holder not relieved though the Purchaser had notice A Copy-holder of Inheritance took a Lease for years of his Copy-hold from the Lord of the Manor the Lord sold his Manor to J. S. who had notice of this Copy-hold of Inheritance yet would not this Court relieve the Copy-holder his Lease being ended for by Law his Copy-hold Estate is determined Robes Purchased the Inheritance of a Copy-hold in the Name of B. and another in Trust B. surrendred his moiety to the Use of his own Son and the other died seized The Son of B. and the Heir of the other for mony sold the Copy-hold to C. for 50 l. being of the value of 80 l. Robes sued the Son of B. and the Heir of the other and C. in Chancery for the 80 l. It was decreed That A. should recover this 50 l. only from B. and the Heir of the other No Recompence for the over-value of an Estate because no Fraud and C. should be discharged of it and hold it in peace But if notice had been proved in C. Robes shall have the Land and no recompence for the over-value was given against the Vendors because no Fraud Moor Rep. n. 745. Kobes Bent and Cock's Case Copy-hold devised without Surrender executed by Decree in Chancery A Copy-hold devised without Surrender it cannot be executed in point of Interest but only by Decree in Chancery by a Concessum in 2 Keb. 837. Harrison's Case A Copy-hold granted out of a Manor confirmed Court Rolls produced A Copy-hold granted at a Court kept out of the Manor confirmed against the Lord who made it Tothil 107. Mark contra Suliard In Corbet and Peshal's Case 12 Jac. it was Ordered That Court Rolls should be brought and shewed to Councel to shew which is Copy-hold and which is Free-hold Composition Decreed Sterling's Case a Composition formerly made between Lords and Tenants Decreed to bind a Purchasor or an Heir 9 Car. Bill in Chancery to reverse a Faux Judgment in the Lords Court If an erroneous Judgment be given in a Copy-hold Court of a common Lord in a Formedon a Bill may be exhibited in Chancery in nature of a Faux Judgment to reverse it Pateshull's Case in Scaccario 1 Rolls Abridgment 373. Admission by Letter of Attorny Copy-holder ought not to be admitted to a Copy-hold Estate by Letter of Attorny for he ought to do Fealty at the time of his Admittance which must be done in person 21 Car. 2. Flyer and Hedgingham Fines certain or not having been tryed at Law no farther Relief here Smith contra Sallet 24 Car. 2. Fines of Copy-holders whether certain or arbitrary it having been tryed at Law and in two Tryals Verdict for Fines certain This Court would not relieve the Plaintiff other than for the preservation of Witnesses and so dismist the Plaintiffs Bill it being to have an Issue directed to try whether certain or not Morgan versus Scudamore 29 Car. 2. The Lord limitted to a
c. as by the particular appraisment sent to the said Commissioners it may appear the value whereof in the total amounts to the sum of c. Now this Indenture witnesseth That the said Commissioners parties to these presents by force and vertue of the said Commission and of the several Acts of Parliament therein mentioned and evpressed for and with the consent and at the request of the Creditors of the said E. F. that have sued forth and prosecuted the said Commission against the said E. F. for and in consideration of the sum of c. unto the said Commissioners by the said C. D. c. to the use benefit and behoof as well of themselves as also of all other the Creditors of the said E. F. that have sued forth and joyned and that shall hereafter in due time joyn in the prosecution of the said Commission according to the Statutes in that behalf made and provided well and truly contented and paid have by force and virtue of the said Commission as much as in them the said Commissioners lyeth and they lawfully may granted bargained and sold and by these presents do as much as in them lyeth and they lawfully may grant bargain and sell unto the said C. D. c. all the aforesaid Copy-hold or customary Messuage c. now in the occupation of c. holden by Copy of Court Roll of the aforesaid Manor of W. together with all Woods Under-woods Commons Pastures c. and Appurtenances whatsoever unto all and every the said Copy-hold or other customary Premisses thereby granted and every part and parcel thereof belonging or in any wise appertaining and all the Estate Right Title Interest Use Possession Reversion and Reversions Remainder and Remainders Claim and Demand whatsoever of the said E. F. of in and to all and singular the Premisses hereby granted and every part and parcel thereof To have and to hold all the said Copy-hold or customary Messuage or Tenement c. with their and every of their Appurtenances to their proper use and behoof for ever according to the Custom of the said Manor of L. Yeilding paying performing and doing unto the said Lord of the aforesaid Manor of whom the Copy-hold or customary Premisses hereby granted are holden all and every the Fines Rents Duties and Services of right used and accustomed to be yeilded paid performed and done for the same c. In Witness c. A Surrender in Trust and the Trust declared Trustees Covenant not to commit c. any thing that may amount to a Forfeiture Whereas the said A. B. hath with his own proper Monies bought and purchased of C. D. of c. Lord of the Manor of Belton in the County of c. amongst other Lands and Tenements in certain Articles indented and made between the said C. D. of the one part and the said A. B. of the other part and bearing date the c. the customary Messuage Lands Tenements and Hereditaments hereafter mentioned that is to say c.. And whereas also the said E. F. G. H. and I. K. customary Tenants of the said Manor of and in the customary Messuage Lands and Premisses did by Surrender bearing date c. according to the Custom of the said Manor surrender into the Hands of the said C. D. Lord of the Manor aforesaid all and singular the customary Messuage Lands Tenements and Hereditaments before mentioned to the use and behoof of them the said I. S. and P. S. their Heirs and Assigns to the intent and purpose that the said C. D. or other the Lord or Lords of the said Manor of c. or the Steward or Stewards of the said Manor for the time being at the next Court to be holden for the said Manor should admit or cause to be admitted them the said I. S. and P. S. Tenants of and to all and singular the said c. as by the said Surrender relation being thereto had may more at large appear Now this Indenture farther Witnesseth That the said I. S. and P. S. for the avoiding and clearing all doubts questions and ambiguities which may hereafter arise or grow touching or concerning the said Surrender taken in their Names as aforesaid do and either of them doth by these presents voluntarily and spontaneously acknowledge express and declare That the said Surrender so had and taken as aforesaid was had taken passed and done by the special direction and appointment of the said A. B. in trust to and for the only use benefit and behoof of him the said A. B. his Heirs and Assigns for ever and to and for none other use intent or purpose whatsoever And farther the said J. S. and P. S. do for themselves their Heirs and Assigns freely and absolutely disclaim any other Estate Right Title Interest Claim or Demand of in to or out of the said customary Messuage Lands and Tenements and Premisses or any part thereof but such only as they have by virtue of the Surrender aforesaid in and upon the Trust aforesaid And the said I. S. and P. S. for themselves their Heirs Executors and Assigns do covenant and grant to and with the said A. B. his Heirs Executors and Assigns that they the said I.S. and P. S. their Heirs or Assigns shall not and will not at any time or times hereafter act do permit or willingly or wittingly suffer any act matter or thing whatsoever that may amount to or cause a Forfeiture of the said Premisses or any part thereof or whereby the said Premisses or any part thereof may be destroyed extinguished impeached or incumbred In Witness c. An Infranchisement of Copy-hold Lands made by a Lord of a Manor to his Copy-holder This Indenture made c. Between A. B. of c. Esquire and E. B. of c. Gentleman Son and Heir apparent of the said A. B. Lord of the Manor of H. in the County of Norfolk of the one part and T. P. of c. R. S. of c. and T. P. of c. of the other part Witnesseth That the said A. B. and E. B. as well for and in consideration of the sum of c. of lawful mony to them the said A. B. and E. B. or one of them in hand paid by the said T. P. R. S. and T. P. at and before the ensealing and delivery of these presents the receipt whereof they the said A. B. and E. B. do by these presents acknowledge and thereof and of every part and parcel thereof do acquit exonerate and discharge the said T. P. R. S. and T. P. and every of them their and every of their Heirs Executors and Administrators for ever by these presents as also for divers other good Causes and Considerations them and either of them hereunto especially moving Have granted bargained sold enfeoffed delivered aliened and confirmed and by these presents do grant bargain sell enfeoff deliver alien and confirm unto the said T. P. R. S. and T. P. their Heirs
Dominoru Manerii pd per virgam secundum consuetud ejusdem Manerii per manus F. E. S. S. custumar ' Tenen pdictur Manerii Et juratur ad capiend sursum redditur in extremis tantum totur illud custumar Messuagiu sive Tenementum suum cum ê‘tin adinde spectan scituatur jacen existen c. infra Parochia cognitur per nomen de c. tunc in tenura sive occupatione T. N. ad opus usum ultur voluntatur sue in scriptis sub manu sigillo suis usus in ead declaratur Quodque pdictur I. C. post confectionem sursum redd pdictur obiit seitur Modo ad hanc Curiam ven A. C. vid mater pdictur I. C. ê“tulit hic in Curiam ultur voluntatem sive Testamentur dic I. C. debÌ„to modo factur probatur in Curiam c. geren datur decimo sexto die Iunii ultimo sciltur pterito tenor cujus quoad Messuagium sive Tenementum pdictur cum ê‘tinen sequitur in his verbis sciltur Whereas I have surrendred into the hands of the Lord of the Manor of c. by the hands of c. two customomary Tenants of the said Manor all that my customary Tenement in c. commonly known by the sign of the c. with the appurtenances to the use and behoof of my last Will and Testament Now therefore my Will and meaning is and I do hereby give devise and bequeath the said Tenement with the Appurtenances lying c. aforesaid to my loving Mother A. C. for and during her natural Life and after her death I do give and devise the same to my Kinsman I. C. Son of I. C. and his heirs for ever upon this condition That he pay unto his Brother T. five pounds and to his Brother S. five pounds being the youngest Son of the said I. C. to be paid to them or their Heirs within one year next after the decease of my said Mother A. C. Et super hoc pdictur A. C. petit se admitti ad pmissa pdictur secundum formam effectum Testam pdictur pro termino vite sue naturalis Cui DnÌ„i per Seneschallum suum pdictur concesser inde seisinam per virgam habend sibi Assign suis pro termino vite sue naturalis remanere inde in forma pdictur Tenend de Dominis per virgam ad voluntatem Dominorum secundum consuetudinem Manerii pdictur per redditur servic consuetud inde prius debitur de jure consuetur Et dat Dominis de fine fecit fidelitatur admissa est inde tenens Et postea sedente Curia predictur A. C. sursum redd in manus Dominorum ê‘ manus Seneschalli sui pdictur ê‘ virgam secundum consuetud Manerii pdictur totur illud Messuagium sive Tenementum pdictur cum pertin vocatur sive cognitur ê‘ nomen c. totum Statu jus titul interesse sua de in eod ad opus usum pdictur I. C. filii I. C. hered assign suorum imperpetuum cui quidem I. fil psen hic in Cur DnÌ„i ê‘ Senescallu suum pdictur concesser inde seisinam ê‘ virgam habend sibi heredibus suis sub conditionibus in ultur voluntate sive Testamento pdictur I. C. defuncti mentionatur contentis Tenend de Dominis per virgam ad voluntat Dominorum secundum consuetudinem Manerii predictur per redditur servitur consuetud inde prius debitur de jure consuetur dat Dominis de fine fecic fidelitatur admissus est inde tenens Licence to demise for years not exceeding one and thirty Ad hanc Cur Licentia conceditur M. O. vid ad dimittend c. tria clÌ„a terre in c. pditur alicui persone vel aliquibus personis pro aliquo termino annorum non Excendentur Termin trigentur unius annorum a festo sui MichÌ„is tunc ê“x sequence Presentment that the customary Tenant died seized and that the Heir came not to take up the Land and Proclamation made Ad hanc Curiam psentatur est per homagÌ„ quod E. H. vid un Customar Tenen hujus Manerii citra ultur Cur ante hanc Cur obiit seisitur de uno Customar Messuagio vocat sive cognitur c. tentur per Copiam Rotulorum Curie hujus Manerii quod W. E. est filius prox here 's dicte E. quia pdictur W. non venit ad Capiend premissa pdictur extra manus Dominorum Ideo prima Proclamatio facta est Presentment that the Mony mentioned in a Surrender was not paid at the time ideo proclamatio prima Ad hanc Curiam HomagÌ„ pdictur super Sacramentur suum pdictur dicunt presentant quod summa Centur triu librarum mentionatur in sursum redd conditional factur per R. F. S. Vxor ejus cuidam E. L. ad ult general Cur tentur pro Manerio pdictur die martis in prima septimana Pasche solubÌ„ suê‘ decim Octavum diem Septembris ultur pteritur non fuit solutur secundum dictam conditionem in dicta sursum redd specificatur Et quia nullus venit c. Ideo prima proclamatio facta est A Fine respited at last Court now taxed Ad hanc Curiam finis pro Admissione I. N. Iun E. I. C. qui admissÌ„ fuer ad ultimam generalem Curiam ad un ClÌ„m terre continen per estimationem novem Acr jacen prope c. suê‘ sursum redd C. N. A. Vxor ' ejus nunc taxatur ad decem libras solvend Senescallo Manerii pdictur apud Cameram sua scituatur in super festum sci T. A. nunc prox sequen inter hor decima duodecim ejusdem diei Presentment That whereas a Surrender precedent was chargable with payment of 100 l. to M. when he should attain the age of 21 years or day of Marriage which should first happen and with a like Sum to A. payable in the same manner M. upon receipt of the 100 l. releaseth and the Surrendree secures the payment of the other 100 l. to A. by Lease Ad hanc Cur comptur est per HomagÌ„ quod premissa in sursum redd superius ultur mentionatur sursum redd per super nominatur I. D. ad T. B. heredibus suis inter alia oneratur fuer cum solutione summe Centur librarum legalis monete Anglie cuidam M. D. soror ' pdictur I. solvend cum attingerit ad etatem vigintur unius annorum vel ad diem maritagii primo contingen cum summa al Centur librarum consimilis monete Anglie cuidam A. D. alteri sorori dic I. solvend in eodem modo prout ê‘ ultimam voluntatem G. D. eorum Avi geren datur decimo quinto die Augusti Anno Domini 1670. plenius apparet quodque pdicta M. etatur suam vigintur unius annorum pimplevit Et ê‘ quoddam scriptum suum sub manu sigillo suis debito modo factur