All Lords of Manors may make Grants. Clarke v. all those cases the grantee must be admitted in the lord's court, and the admittance entered on the rolls; for the title of the grantee depends entirely on the entry made in the court-rolls. 4. It was resolved in 26 Eliz. that all those who have a lawful estate or interest in a manor, be it in fee, in tail, for life or years, or even at will; if a Pennifather, copyhold escheats, or comes to them in any other 4 Rep. 23 b. 1 Inst. 58 b. way, may regrant it, reserving the ancient rents, Nevill's case, customs, and services; and it shall bind the lord who has the inheritance or freehold of the manor; for each of them is dominus pro tempore, and within the custom. The reason is, that a copyholder does not derive his estate out of that of the lord only; for then the copyhold would cease with the estate of the lord; but from the custom. 11 Rep. 18 a. Ten. 205. 1 Inst. 58 b. 5. Lord Chief Baron Gilbert says, the principle upon which this doctrine is founded is, that copyholders were originally mere tenants at will; and so, though the lord pro tempore had only a particular estate, yet he might grant copyholds; as it could be no prejudice, but rather an advantage, to the succeeding lord, in respect to the rents and services reserved in such grants. Besides, the succeeding lord might turn out the copyholder. And when the law was so altered that the copyholder acquired a permanent interest in his estate, it was still held that a lord pro tempore might grant copyholds in fee, though he had but a particular estate. 6. If a lord of a manor devises that his executor shall grant copyholds, according to the custom of the manor, for payment of his debts; the executor, though he has no estate in the manor, may make grants accordingly. 7. If a bishop grants customary lands by copy, 4 Rep. 21 b. and dies; the copyhold is not determined. Such a grant shall also bind the Crown, where the tempo- . Tit. 32. c. 2. ralties come into the king's hands. Nor are bishops 4 Bac. Ab. 72. and other ecclesiastical persons or corporations restrained, either by the stat. 1 or 13 Eliz., from making grants of copyhold lands in fee, in tail, for lives, or years, according to the custom of the manor. And no confirmation is necessary to establish such grants, though made by a sole corporation. 8. In the statute 1 Anne, by which the crown is Tit. 34. restrained from alienation, there is an exception, as to grants or admittances of copyholds, parcel of any manor belonging to the Crown. Moo. 147. 9. It was resolved in 26 Eliz. that a lord of a Carew's case, manor who was only tenant for life, or for any other particular estate, might grant copyholds in reversion, though not executed in the life of the grantor.. But March 6. in another case the Court was of opinion, that to make Gilb. Ten. such a grant good, there should be a custom to enable the lord to grant in reversion. 204. Gay v. Kay, 661. 1 Roll. Ab. 10. If tenant in dower of a manor grants a copyhold in reversion, where by custom it may be granted in that way, it will bind the heir; though the reversion be not executed in her lifetime. It is the same v. Radlin, of a guardian in socage. 1 499. Shapland 1 Roll. Ab. 499. Estate. 1 Inst. 58 b. 11. There is however one exception to this rule; Provided they have for persons not having a lawful estate in a manor, a lawful cannot make copyhold grants. Thus it is settled, that tenants at sufferance, disseisors, abators, or intruders, cannot bind the lawful owners of a manor by their grants of copyholds. held 4 Rep. 24 a. Artris, 12. A. was tenant of a manor for the life of B., who Rous v. died; A. continued in possession of the manor, courts, and made voluntary grants by copy. 4 Rep. 24 a. Ad- 2 Leon. 45. Though under personal Disabilities. Co. Cop. $34. Idem. judged, that these grants did not bind the lessor; because, after the death of B., A. was only tenant at sufferance. 13. In voluntary grants made by the lord himself, the law does not respect the quality of his person. For be he an infant, non compos mentis, an idiot or lunatic, an outlaw or excommunicate, he is capable of making voluntary grants. 14. So if the lord of a manor commits felony or murder, and process of outlawry is awarded against him, and after the exigent, he grants copyhold estates according to the custom, then is attainted, the grants are good; though by relation the manor was Tit. 1. § 78. forfeited from the time of the exigent awarded. So if the lord had been attainted by verdict or confession, any grant by copy, after the felony or murder committed, would be good, notwithstanding the relation. A Steward may make Grants. Harris v. Jays, Cro. Eliz. 699. 15. A steward of a manor may make voluntary grants of copyholds, for he represents the lord to all intents. And where a copyholder of a manor belonging to the Crown was attainted of felony, by which his copyhold escheated; it was held that the steward might grant it again er officio, without any special warrant. For the custom of the manor enabled the steward pro tempore to grant it; and the Crown was bound by the custom. 16. A steward appointed by the king's auditor to hold a court pro hac vice, cannot make voluntary grants of copyholds; because such an auditor has no authority to appoint stewards. 17. A steward appointed by a private person may make voluntary grants of copyholds, notwithstanding any subsequent disability of the person who appointed him. case, Ley. 47. 18. A lord of a manor granted the stewardship Blewitt's thereof by deed to W. S. for life. The lord was afterwards found a lunatic, and his estate committed to the care of certain persons. Resolved, that the committees could not grant copyholds, as they had no estate in the manor. But the lunatic, by his steward, might grant copyholds, according to the custom. It was however ordered, that the steward should grant none, without the privity of the com mittees. Grants may Co. Cop. § 35. 19. All persons who are capable of taking by grant To whom at common law, are also capable of taking grants of be made. copyholds, according to the custom. An infant, a person of nonsane memory, an idiot, a lunatic, an outlaw, or an excommunicated person, may also be grantees of a copyhold. 20. A lord of a manor cannot make a copyhold grant immediately to his wife. v. Pennant, 2 Wils. R. 21. The Rev. W. Symes being rector and lord of Firebrass the Manor of Compton Martin, in the county of Somerset, the premises in question being parcel of 254. the said manor, held by copy of court-roll, fell into the hands of the said rector by the death of the last tenant, and he demised the same to his wife, to hold to her and two other persons for their lives. It did appear that there was any custom in this or any other manor, for a lord to grant lands by copy of court-roll to his wife immediately, without the intervention of a third person. not The Court said, that as this was a provision by a husband for his wife, they would be glad, if possible, to get over that maxim of law, that a husband and wife are one person, therefore could not grant lands to one another. So, where there was no particular custom in a manor, the common law must take place. The Custom must be observed. This was an original and voluntary grant by the husband to his wife, who could not by law take immediately from him, any more than a monk, who was dead in law, and considered as no person. So here was no person to take, for the wife and husband were only one person. They were dealing with a fundamental maxim of the common law, and might as well repeal the first section of Littleton, as determine this grant from the husband immediately to his wife to be good, where there was not so much as the shadow of a person intervening. The Court determined, reluctantly, that the grant was void. 22. In all voluntary grants of copyholds, the custom of the manor must be strictly pursued. Lord Co.Cop. § 41. Coke says, that though it is in the lord's power to keep the land in his own hands, or to dispose of it at his pleasure; yet, because in disposing of it he is bound to observe the custom precisely in every point, and can neither in estate or tenure bring in any alteration, in this respect the law accounts him custom's instrument. Ten. 193. 23. Lord Chief Baron Gilbert has observed on this passage, that the reason of it seems to be, because there is nothing but custom to warrant the grant by copy, which ought therefore to be strictly pursued, as to the estates, customs, services, and tenures; or else it is not the estate that was granted before. Yet if there be a copyholder in fee, it seems the lord may release part of the services, and not do any prejudice to the copyholder's estate; for there is an estate in being, that appears to be the old estate. But when the lord grants a new estate by copy, since it is an estate against common right, and warranted only by the custom, that must be strictly pursued to bind the heir. |