DOCSLIB.ORG

Oxford Scholarship Online

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oxford Scholarship Online Tenure University Press Scholarship Online Oxford Scholarship Online A History of the Land Law A. W. B. Simpson Print publication date: 1986 Print ISBN-13: 9780198255376 Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198255376.001.0001 Tenure A. W. B. Simpson DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198255376.003.0001 Abstract and Keywords This chapter focuses on the doctrines of tenure. The two most striking doctrines of the land law, at least on first acquaintance, are the doctrines of tenure and of estates. Although the importance of tenures is now minimal, the basic doctrine of tenure still exists. The doctrine of tenure has its origin in the state of social organization known as ‘feudalism’. This chapter discusses in detail the diversity and the classification of tenures. The main purpose of classifying tenures is the help in determining the incidents which the tenant must pay. Keywords: tenure, land law, estates, feudalism, social organization, tenants EVEN today the two most striking doctrines of the land law, at least on first acquaintance, are the doctrines of tenure and of estates. Modern writers are at pains to warn the student of the comparative unimportance of tenure in the modern law, and point to a Page 1 of 19 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: University of Cambridge; date: 11 November 2014 Tenure series of statutes which have eliminated from our law almost all the direct effects of the tenurial relationship of lord and tenant, and reduced the types of tenures which can still exist. Indeed, so unimportant have tenures become that nobody certainly knows what sorts of tenure can still exist, and in practice this matters not at all.1 But although the importance of tenures is now minimal, the basic doctrine of tenure is still with us; all land whatsoever is held, mediately or immediately, that is directly or indirectly, of the Crown.2 Intimately connected with this axiom, nulle terre sans seigneur, is the doctrine of estates, whose development, in part at least, was forced upon the common lawyers by the theoretical difficulties raised by the doctrine of tenure. The doctrine of estates too is still with us, though in a guise which would hardly be intelligible to a medieval lawyer. But although the fundamental nature of these two doctrines is avowed in the leading modern textbook on real property,3 estates no longer have the fascination that once they had, and tenure is little discussed. The emphasis of the modern law passes both doctrines by, and rightly so. If we go back into the history of the land law the emphasis changes. In the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries the ablest property lawyers are concerned to work out the subtleties of the rules governing the limitation of estates, particularly in connection with the elaborate family settlements of the time;4 when we reach the fifteenth (p.2) century Littleton's treatise on the law of real property is traditionally called Tenures,5 and though he deals at length with the doctrine of estates it is the tenurial quality of the law which bulks largest in his analysis. Indeed the farther back we travel in time the more important does tenure become. Feudalism and the Conquest The doctrine of tenure has its origin in the state of social organization known as ‘feudalism’. ‘Feudalism’ is undoubtedly a vague and imprecise term, with a number of connotations. For our immediate purpose it is sufficient to note that the feudal structure of society, which was firmly established in England after the Norman Conquest, involved dependent land holding—the holding of land in return for the rendering of services, typically military service. What was involved was both a personal relationship between superior and inferior, lord and vassal, marked by reciprocal duties of protection and service, and the granting of a benefice, that is, a parcel of landed estate to be enjoyed upon favourable terms, so long as the service due was faithfully performed. In cases where the tenant failed to observe the customary feudal obligations involved in his tenure he could be disciplined, even to the extent of losing his status as tenant and thus his land, and the feudal or seignorial court of his lord, whose function it was to see that custom was observed, resembled a modern military tribunal in that it was concerned as much with discipline as with justice. Even before the Conquest land tenure of a sort was known; the loan of land6 created a relationship between lender and holder which closely resembles the feudal relationship between lord and tenant of post-Conquest times, and the relationship between the Saxon lord and the village community where he held sway could be described in tenurial terms. How widespread tenure was in Anglo-Saxon (p.3) England is a moot point, and a somewhat artificial one; until there was a theory of tenure the question can hardly be asked.7 What is clear is that the Norman administrators did have a theory of tenure, and applied it universally; all land whatsoever was held of some lord, and ultimately of the Crown. This is fully recognized in Domesday Book (1086) and Page 2 of 19 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy). Subscriber: University of Cambridge; date: 11 November 2014 Tenure certainly no such rigid doctrine could possibly have existed before 1066; indeed, in England alone was feudalism so universalized.8 On the Continent feudal land-holding did not engulf all land; some tracts of land—called allodial lands—escaped the net. In Domesday Book the compilers sometimes seem puzzled by a landholder who seems to have no lord, but such puzzlement is assumed to arise rather from ignorance of the facts than from any exception to the universal application of the concept of tenure. The consequence of this was that feudal law did not simply become the law of the knightly, aristocratic class, nor the law of some parts of the country alone; it became the common law of England. This triumph of order was made possible by the Conquest, and by the high degree of administrative efficiency attained by King William's staff. The invasion of England by a band of military adventurers made it necessary to quarter this military aristocracy on the conquered land; William had to reward his followers and preserve his military strength for the future. He was able to achieve both these ends by parcelling up the land of the country amongst his followers, who became his tenants for their land, holding by his grant.9 In return he bargained for services; and most of his tenants were bound to serve in the royal army and bring with them a specified number of knights. The tenure thus created was knight-service, the typical feudal (p.4) tenure, and it was wholly Norman.10 The tenant who owed the service of ten knights was said to hold ten knight's fees,11 and so on; there is some evidence to show that the quota of knights due was fixed in multiples of five or ten knights.12 The immediate tenants of the Crown were called his tenants in chief, and there were probably about fifteen hundred of these tenants by 1086. Now when it is said that the country was granted out by the King to his tenants in chief it must not be imagined that any process of wholesale eviction took place; a system of parasitism was involved, and parasites cannot survive the destruction of their hosts. At the bottom of the social scale were those humble peasants who actually wrested the agricultural wealth of the country from the soil; it was their labour which made the whole paraphernalia of knights and castles possible. At the time of the Conquest many were slaves, the property of some Saxon lord; some were free men who had a lord, but who did not hold their lands of their lord, for their personal relationship of dependence was unconnected with their enjoyment of land. Others perhaps could be regarded as tenants, who held of their lords. The greater part of these peasants would be bound by custom to perform various duties of a public nature, such as to repair bridges, and also other duties which were of personal benefit to the Saxon lord of the village community in which they lived—for example they might be bound to provide him with a food rent, or to labour on the land of their lord. The tendency before the Conquest had been for the peasants of a village community to become increasingly dependent upon the local lord, and it has been suggested that it may have often happened that the peasants surrendered their lands into the local lord's hands and received them back again in return for an obligation to labour on their lord's land; in return for a greater degree of subservience the peasants received the protection of a powerful man. In general (p.5) the effect of the Norman Conquest was only to substitute a new, alien, lord for his Saxon Page 3 of 19 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oxford Scholarship Online
    Uses, Wills, and Fiscal Feudalism University Press Scholarship Online Oxford Scholarship Online The Oxford History of the Laws of England: Volume VI 1483–1558 John Baker Print publication date: 2003 Print ISBN-13: 9780198258179 Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: March 2012 DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258179.001.0001 Uses, Wills, and Fiscal Feudalism Sir John Baker DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198258179.003.0035 Abstract and Keywords This chapter examines property law related to uses, wills, and fiscal feudalism in England during the Tudor period. It discusses the conflict between landlords and tenants concerning land use, feoffment, and land revenue. The prevalence of uses therefore provoked a conflict of interests which could not be reduced to a simple question of revenue evasion. This was a major problem because during this period, the greater part of the land of England was in feoffments upon trust. Keywords: fiscal feudalism, land use, feoffments, property law, tenants, wills, landlords ANOTHER prolonged discussion, culminating in a more fundamental and far-reaching reform, concerned another class of tenant altogether, the tenant by knight-service. Here the debate concerned a different aspect of feudal tenure, the valuable ‘incidents’ which belonged to the lord on the descent of such a tenancy to an heir. The lord was entitled to Page 1 of 40 PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2014. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).
    [Show full text]
  • On the Agricultural Community of the Middle Ages, and Inclosures of the Sixteenth Century in England
    On The Agricultural Community of the Middle Ages, and Inclosures of the Sixteenth Century in England. Second Edition. Translated from the German of Erwin Nasse, by Colonel H. A. Odvey (Late 9th Lancers). “In der Beherrschung der Erde liegt die Kraft des Mannes und des Staates: die Grösse Roms ist gebaut auf die ausgedehnteste und unmittelbarste Herrschaft der Burger uber den Boden and auf die geschlossene Einheit dieser also festgegründeten Bauerschaft.” — MOMMSEN. Erwin Nasse (1829–1890) Originally published 1872. by Williams and Norgate London. This edition published 2003 Batoche Books [email protected] Contents Translator’s Preface. .......................................................................... 5 Preface. .............................................................................................. 6 On the Agricultural Community of the Middle Ages. ....................... 8 Notes: ............................................................................................... 82 Translator’s Preface. The extract from a speech of Richard Cobden, which appeared as a Preface to the First Edition of this work, has been omitted in the present issue, as it might be supposed to stamp with a political character that which is merely an academical essay. H. A. Ouvey. 29, Hyde Park Place, January 1st, 1872. Preface. The translation of this work, which was published under the distin- guished sanction of the Cobden Club by Colonel H. A. Ouvry, C.B., having now reached a second edition, a few explanatory words from the author may not seem out of place. The original treatise was published in 1869, as one of those academical essays which are distributed annually to the Members of this University before the 3rd of August, the anniversary of the day on which the University was founded in 1818. These essays are intended to contain the results of purely scientific researches.
    [Show full text]
  • LECTURE 5 the Origins of Feudalism
    OUTLINE — LECTURE 5 The Origins of Feudalism A Brief Sketch of Political History from Clovis (d. 511) to Henry IV (d. 1106) 632 death of Mohammed The map above shows to the growth of the califate to roughly 750. The map above shows Europe and the East Roman Empire from 533 to roughly 600. – 2 – The map above shows the growth of Frankish power from 481 to 814. 486 – 511 Clovis, son of Merovich, king of the Franks 629 – 639 Dagobert, last effective Merovingian king of the Franks 680 – 714 Pepin of Heristal, mayor of the palace 714 – 741 Charles Martel, mayor (732(3), battle of Tours/Poitiers) 714 – 751 - 768 Pepin the Short, mayor then king 768 – 814 Charlemagne, king (emperor, 800 – 814) 814 – 840 Louis the Pious (emperor) – 3 – The map shows the Carolingian empire, the Byzantine empire, and the Califate in 814. – 4 – The map shows the breakup of the Carolingian empire from 843–888. West Middle East 840–77 Charles the Bald 840–55 Lothair, emp. 840–76 Louis the German 855–69 Lothair II – 5 – The map shows the routes of various Germanic invaders from 150 to 1066. Our focus here is on those in dark orange, whom Shepherd calls ‘Northmen: Danes and Normans’, popularly ‘Vikings’. – 6 – The map shows Europe and the Byzantine empire about the year 1000. France Germany 898–922 Charles the Simple 919–36 Henry the Fowler 936–62–73 Otto the Great, kg. emp. 973–83 Otto II 987–96 Hugh Capet 983–1002 Otto III 1002–1024 Henry II 996–1031 Robert II the Pious 1024–39 Conrad II 1031–1060 Henry I 1039–56 Henry III 1060–1108 Philip I 1056–1106 Henry IV – 7 – The map shows Europe and the Mediterranean lands in roughly the year 1097.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Notes on Manors & Manorial History
    SOME NOTES ON MANORS & MANORIAL HISTORY BY A. HAMILTON THOMPSON, M.A.. D.Litt.. F.B.A..F.S.A. Some Notes on Manors & Manorial History By A. Hamilton Thompson, M.A., D.Litt., F.B.A., F.S.A. The popular idea of a manor assumes that it is a fixed geo­ graphical area with definite boundaries, which belongs to a lord with certain rights over his tenants. In common usage, we speak of this or that lordship, almost in the same way in which we refer to a parish. It is very difficult, however, to give the word an exclusively geographical meaning. If we examine one of those documents which are known as Inquisitions post mortem, for example, we shall find that, at the death of a tenant who holds his property directly from the Crown, the king's escheator will make an extent, that is, a detailed valuation, of his manors. This will consist for the most part of a list of a number of holdings with names of the tenants, specifying the rent or other services due to the lord from each. These holdings will, it is true, be generally gathered together in one or more vills or townships, of which the manor may roughly be said to consist. But it will often be found that there are outlying holdings in other vills which owe service to a manor, the nucleus of which is at some distance. Thus the members of the manor of Rothley lay scattered at various distances from their centre, divided from it and from each other by other lordships.
    [Show full text]
  • Read an Extract from Land and Family
    Contents List of figures ix List of tables x Abbreviations xii General Editor’s preface xiii Preface xv 1 The peasant land market and the Winchester pipe rolls by P.D.A. Harvey 1 2 The bishop’s estate 11 The bishop of Winchester’s estate 12 The pipe rolls 13 Other estate records 17 Principal sources of supply 18 Population 25 Location and commerce 27 The regional distribution of fines 28 Conclusion 35 3 Units of property 37 Virgated tenements 38 Unvirgated lands 48 Cottages, cotlands, messuages and houses 51 Property outside agriculture 54 Conclusion 55 4 Tenures 57 Changes affecting customary tenure 58 Changes affecting non-customary tenure 64 Tenures and the written word 68 Conclusion 70 5 Entry fines 71 The changing number of transfers 71 The changing level of average entry fines, 1263–1349 74 The changing level of average entry fines, 1350–1415 77 Conclusion 82 Land and Family 6 Families and their land 84 Families and outsiders 84 Intermanorial and interregional variation 90 New tensions, new devices 97 Conclusion 101 7 Transfers within families 103 Custom and inheritance: (a) widows 104 Custom and inheritance: (b) sons 108 The impact of epidemics 110 Ways of modifying custom 112 Intrafamilial transfers inter vivos 113 Marriage 115 Conclusion 116 8 Buyers and sellers 118 Transactions between families inter vivos 119 Buyers and sellers 120 Reasons for selling 123 Extrafamilial transfers post mortem 126 Leases 128 Conclusion 131 9 Accumulation 132 Before the Black Death 132 After the Black Death 136 Large accumulations 142 The polarisation of land tenure 148 Conclusions 150 10 Conclusions 152 The estate as a whole 152 Regional differences 154 Intermanorial differences 155 Appendix 159 Bibliography 161 Index 169 viii Chapter 1 The peasant land market and the Winchester pipe rolls P.D.A.
    [Show full text]
  • RIEVAULX ABBEY and ITS SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT, 1132-1300 Emilia
    RIEVAULX ABBEY AND ITS SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT, 1132-1300 Emilia Maria JAMROZIAK Submitted in Accordance with the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Leeds School of History September 2001 The candidate confirms that the work submitted is her own and that appropriate credit has been given where reference has been made to the work of others i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr Wendy Childs for her continuous help and encouragement at all stages of my research. I would also like to thank other faculty members in the School of History, in particular Professor David Palliser and Dr Graham Loud for their advice. My thanks go also to Dr Mary Swan and students of the Centre for Medieval Studies who welcomed me to the thriving community of medievalists. I would like to thank the librarians and archivists in the Brotherton Library Leeds, Bodleian Library Oxford, British Library in London and Public Record Office in Kew for their assistance. Many people outside the University of Leeds discussed several aspects of Rievaulx abbey's history with me and I would like to thank particularly Dr Janet Burton, Dr David Crouch, Professor Marsha Dutton, Professor Peter Fergusson, Dr Brian Golding, Professor Nancy Partner, Dr Benjamin Thompson and Dr David Postles as well as numerous participants of the conferences at Leeds, Canterbury, Glasgow, Nottingham and Kalamazoo, who offered their ideas and suggestions. I would like to thank my friends, Gina Hill who kindly helped me with questions about English language, Philip Shaw who helped me to draw the maps and Jacek Wallusch who helped me to create the graphs and tables.
    [Show full text]
  • STATUTE QUIA EMPTORES (1290) Statutes of the Realm, Vol
    STATUTE QUIA EMPTORES (1290) Statutes of the Realm, vol. I, p . I 06. Whereas the buyers of lands and tenements belonging to the fees of great men and other [lords] have in times past often entered [those] fees to [the lords'] prejudice, because tenants holding freely of those great men and other [lords] have sold their lands and tenements [to those buyers] to hold in fee to [the buyers] and their heirs of their feoffors and not of the chief lords of the fees, with the result that the same chief lords have often lost the escheats, marriages and wardships of lands and tenements belonging to their fees; and this has seemed to the same great men and other lords [not only] very bard and burdensome [but also] in such a case to their manifest disinheritance: The lord king in his parliament at Westminster after Easter in 10 Tenure: services and incidents the eighteenth. year of his reign, namely a fortnight after the feast of St John the Baptist, at the instance of the great men of his realm, has granted, provided and laid down that from henceforth it shall be lawful for any free man at his own pleasure to sell his lands or tenements or [any] part of them; provided however that the feoffee shall hold those lands or tenements of the same chief lord and by the same services and customary dues as his feoffor previously held them. And if he sells to another any part of his same lands or tenements, the feoffee shall hold that [part] directly of the chief lord and shall immediately be burdened with such amount of service as belongs or ought to belong to the same lord for that part according to the amount of the land or tenement [that has been] sold; and so in this case that part of the service falls to the chief lord to be taken by the hand of the [feoffee], so that the feoffee ought to look and answer to the same chief lord for that part of the service owed as [is proportional to] the amount of the land or tenement sold.
    [Show full text]
  • Novel Disseisin5 Was Instituted As a Possessory Protection of Freehold Property Rights
    IV–42 THE AGE OF PROPERTY: THE ASSIZES OF HENRY II SEC. 4 75. ?1236. “The fees of those who hold of the lord king in chief within the liberty of St. Edmunds to whom the lord king does not write.... Hugh de Polstead holds two fees and two parts of a fee in Polstead of the honour of Rayleigh [Essex].” The Book of Fees 1:600. (This document is probably connected with what is variously called an ‘aid’ or a ‘scutage’ which was levied on the occasion of the marriage of Isabella, Henry III’s sister, to the Emperor Frederick II in July of 1235. The lord of the honour of Rayleigh was Hubert de Burgh, Henry III’s justiciar, from 1215 until his downfall in 1232. The honour was in an ambiguous status in 1236; from 1237 it was in the king’s hands, as it was from 1163 to 1215. Sanders, English Baronies 139.) 76. 1242 X 1243. Surrey. “Of the honour of William de Windsor. Hugh de Polstead holds a half a knights fee in Compton of the same honour.” Id. 2 (1923) 685. (This is a document connected with the great scutage raised in connection with Henry III’s expedition to Gascony in 1242. The honour of William de Windsor was one-half of the honour of Eton [Bucks]. His father, also William, and his father’s cousin Walter had divided the honour in 1198 after fifteen years in which the inheritance had been disputed. Walter’s portion passed to his sisters Christiana and Gunnor in 1203, the latter of whom was married to ?Hugh I de Hosdeny.
    [Show full text]
  • Law Commission – How We Consult
    Making a will Consultation Paper 231 (Consultation Paper 231) Making a will © Crown Copyright 2017 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU or email [email protected]. This publication is available at www.lawcom.gov.uk. THE LAW COMMISSION – HOW WE CONSULT About the Law Commission: The Law Commission was set up by section 1 of the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the law. The Law Commissioners are: The Rt Hon Lord Justice Bean, Chairman, Professor Nicholas Hopkins, Stephen Lewis, Professor David Ormerod QC and Nicholas Paines QC. The Chief Executive is Phillip Golding. Topic of this consultation: The law of wills. This consultation paper sets out options for reforming the law of wills and seeks consultees’ views on those options. The paper also asks consultees a number of open questions related to the law of wills. Geographical scope: This consultation paper applies to the law of England and Wales. Availability of materials: The consultation paper is available on our website at http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/wills/. Duration of the consultation: We invite responses from 13 July 2017 to 10 November 2017. Comments may be sent: By email to [email protected] OR By post to Damien Bruneau, Law Commission, 1st Floor, Tower, 52 Queen Anne’s Gate, London, SW1H 9AG.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Interests in Property in Minnesota Everett Rf Aser
    University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository Minnesota Law Review 1919 Future Interests in Property in Minnesota Everett rF aser Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Fraser, Everett, "Future Interests in Property in Minnesota" (1919). Minnesota Law Review. 1283. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/mlr/1283 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the University of Minnesota Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Minnesota Law Review collection by an authorized administrator of the Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW FUTURE INTERESTS IN PROPERTY IN MINNESOTA "ORIGINALLY the creation of future interests at law was greatly restricted, but now, either by the Statutes of Uses and of Wills, or by modern legislation, or by the gradual action of the courts, all restraints on the creation of future interests, except those arising from remoteness, have been done away. This practically reduces the law restricting the creation of future interests to the Rule against Perpetuities,"' Generally in common law jurisdictions today there is but one rule restricting the crea- tion of future interests, and that rule is uniform in its application to real property and to personal property, to legal and equitable interests therein, to interests created by way of trust, and to powers. In 1830 the New York Revised Statutes went into effect in New York state. The revision had been prepared by a commis- sion appointed for the purpose five years before. It contained a code of property law in which "the revisers undertook to re- write the whole law of future estates in land, uses and trusts ..
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on the Lancaster Estates in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries
    NOTES ON THE LANCASTER ESTATES IN THE THIRTEENTH AND FOURTEENTH CENTURIES BY DOROTHEA OSCHINSKY, D.Phil., Ph.D. Read 24 April 1947 UR knowledge of mediaeval estate administration is O based mainly on sources which relate to ecclesiastical estates, because these are easier of access and, as a rule, more complete. The death of an abbot affected a monastic estate only in so far as his successor might be a better or a worse husbandman; the estate was never divided between heirs, was not diminished by the endowment of widows and daughters, and was not doubled by prudent marriages as were seignorial estates. Furthermore, the ecclesiastics had frequently been granted their lands in frankalmoin, and no rent or service was rendered in return. With few exceptions their manors lay near the centre of the estate; and, finally, the clerics had sufficient leisure to supervise their estates themselves and little difficulty in providing a staff trained to work the estates intensively and profitably. Therefore we realise that any conclusions which are based on ecclesiastical estates only must necessarily be one-sided, and that before we can draw a general picture of the estate administration in the Middle Ages, we have to work out the estate adminis­ tration on at least some of the more important seignorial estates. The Lancaster estates with their changing fate are well able to reveal the chief characteristics of a seignorial estate, its extent, management and administration. The vastness of the estates of the Earls of Lancaster, and the importance of the family in the political history of the country, accen­ tuated and multiplied the difficulties of the estate adminis­ tration.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law by Charles
    BOOK REVIEWS Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law. By Charles Montgomery Gray. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1963. Pp. 254. $6.50. Copyholds are not. and never have been a part of the American law of property.' Hence American lawyers-even those who specialize in the law of property-will not be immediately concerned with Professor Gray's monograph on Copyhold, Equity, and the Common Law. Nevertheless, American legal scholars, some of whom will surely be conveyancers, should be much interested in and perhaps even excited by Professor Gray's report. It is an extensive study of the numerous bills and other pleadings in the Court of Chancery, the Star Chamber, and the Court of Requests of the reign of Henry VIII, examined at the Public Records Office, and of the many unprinted reports of common law cases, princi- pally of the sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, found in various collections of manuscripts in the British Museum. The appeal of the study for American lawyers will not depend upon the details of the law of copyholds which Professor Gray reports, but rather upon the development of remedies for the protection of copy- holders which he traces in careful detail. At the beginning of the period of the study, copyhold lands were "owned" by the lord of the manor in which they were situated. Though those lands had been used by the copyholders and their predecessors from time immemorial, the interest which they had was classified as a tenancy at the will of the lord of the manor in whom both the seisin and the freehold were vested.
    [Show full text]