voluntary waste and forfeiture, against which it was objected that the Court never gave relief, yet he thought the rules of equity not so strict, but that relief might be given, even against voluntary waste and forfeiture. Somerset, 227. 69. A copyholder made leases not warranted by Peachey v. the custom of the manor, and worked a quarry of stone from his freehold lands into the copyhold, 568. 2 Ab. Eq. without licence. Afterwards his son cut down trees, and inclosed some of the copyhold lands, notwithstanding several repeated admonitions from the lord; who brought his ejectment, and had a verdict as for a forfeiture. On a bill brought for relief, Lord Macclesfield was clear of opinion that there was no foundation for equity to interpose. That it would be to alter the nature of the tenure whereby copyholds subsisted. That if this was a forfeiture at law, a court of equity had nothing to do with it; and that it was like the case of a feoffment or fine levied by a particular tenant, against which there could be no relief. That copyholders were but tenants at will, though it were according to the custom of the manor. That this entirely differed from the case of a forfeiture for nonpayment of rent or of a fine; for there the estate was in the nature of a security for those sums, and the lord might be recompensed in damages and costs. That making a lease for years was a forfeiture, as it was a determination of his will: and though the lord should refuse to grant a licence, yet the tenant had no remedy, nor would the Court compel the lord to grant such licence. That though those copyholds were mended by time, and were in the nature of an inheritance, yet still the tenant was obliged to observe the law and custom to which they were subject. That these customs were in the nature of the limitations of an estate, which determined on the breach of them and that unless there were some equitable circumstances in the case, the Court could not interpose, as that would be to repeal and destroy the law. COPY SECTION 1. OPYHOLD estates may be destroyed in several to be held by copy of court roll, according to the cus- the Lord. 2. Thus if a copyholder surrenders his estate to Surrender to the lord, to the use of the lord, the copyhold is thereby extinguished. It is however necessary in a case of this kind, that the lord to whom the surrender is made have a lawful estate in the manor; for a surrender by a copyholder to a person who is possessed of the manor by wrong, will not operate as an extinguishment of the copyhold. Moore, 3. A bishop having been disseised of a manor dur- Pitt v. ing Cromwell's usurpation, a copyholder surrendered 2 Show. 156. to the disseisor, ut inde faciat voluntatem suam. After T. Jones, the restoration, the bishop entered. Resolved, the copyhold was not extinguished, because the render was void. 153. that Roe v. sur Wigg. St. Paul v. Dudley and Ward, 15 Ves. 167. Release to the Lord. Gilb. Ten. 300. Idem. Case, 4. It was held by Lord Eldon, in a late case, that where the lord of a manor was tenant for life, with remainders over, and purchased in a copyhold held of the manor, taking the surrender to him and his heirs, it was extinguished; and as parcel became subject to the limitations of the manor. 5. If a copyholder releases all his estate and interest to his lord, it will operate as an extinguishment of his copyhold. For although a release cannot in its own nature pass away a possession, yet it may amount to a signification of the tenant's intention to hold the lands no longer; and the rule is, that every thing amounting to a determination of the copyholder's will to hold no longer, extinguishes the copyhold. 6. So if the lord conveys away the freehold of a copyhold to a stranger, and the copyholder releases 1 Leon. 102. to the stranger; this will also extinguish the copyhold. But if a copyholder be ousted, and the lord of the manor disseised, and the copyholder releases to the disseisor, it will have no effect. Mortimer's Hett. 150. 1 Leon. 170. 7. Any conveyance of the land by the lord to the copyholder, for an estate of freehold, or even for a term of years, will extinguish the copyhold. For the estate of the copyholder being only at will, becomes merged by the accession of any greater estate. 8. If the lord demises the land held by copy to a stranger for years, and the stranger assigns over his term to the copyholder, this will extinguish the copyhold; for both these interests cannot exist in the same person, simul et semel; and consequently one of them must be determined, which of necessity must be the customary estate, for the estate derived from the common law cannot merge in that; and when common law and custom come together, and one or the other must necessarily stand, the common law shall be preferred. 9. It has been resolved, upon the same principle, Hide v. that where a copyholder in fee took a lease for years Moo. 185. Newport, of the manor, the copyhold was extinct for ever, and 4 Rep. 31 b. not during the lease only. ment. 10. The next mode of extinguishing a copyhold, Enfranchiseis by enfranchisement, by which the tenure is changed from base to free. This may be done by the lord's releasing to the copyholder his seignioral rights and services, by which the tenure is extinguished. For 1 Inst. 270 b. as the copyholder was tenant at will to the lord, by Tit. 32. c. 6. which there was a privity of estate between them, the release enlarges the copyholder's estate, and gives him the freehold. 11. It has been stated, that a conveyance of the ante, § 7. freehold by the lord to the copyholder, extinguishes the copyhold; for in fact it operates indirectly as an enfranchisement, because a freehold and a copy- ante, § 8. hold tenure cannot subsist together. 12. Upon a question whether lands were freehold Doe v. Huntingon, or customary, it appeared that they had originally 4 East, 271. been customary, or tenant right estates, holden of a manor in Cumberland, by the payment of certain ancient customary rents and other services; and descendible from ancestor to heir: that the lord of the manor, by an indenture made in 24 Cha. II., in consideration of 61 years rent, ratified and confirmed to the then tenant and his heirs, all his customary and tenant right estate, with the appurtenances, &c., and granted, that the tenant and his heirs should be freed, acquitted, exempted, and discharged from the payment of all rents, fines, heriots, &c. dues, customs, services, and demands, at any time thereafter happening |