heir does not require investiture from the lord within that time, he shall forfeit his feud. 82. If the vassal refused to perform the services which were reserved upon the investiture, he forfeited his feud. Non est alia justior causa beneficii auferendi Lib. Feud. id. quam si id propter quod beneficium datum fuerit, hoc servitium facere recusaverit, quia beneficium amittit. 83. If the vassal aliened the feud, or did any act by which its value was considerably diminished; he forfeited it. Si vassallus feudum dissipaverit, aut Zasins, 91. insigni detrimento deterius fecerit, privabitur. 84. If the vassal denied that he held his feud of the lord, by saying that he held it of some other person; or denied that the land was held by a feudal tenure, he forfeited it. 85. Every species of felony operated as a forfeiture of the feud; being the highest breach of the vassal's oath of fealty. Craig, Lib. 3. Tit. 5. § 1. might forfeit his Seignory. 86. It has been stated that the feudal lord was The Lord equally bound to observe the terms of relation on his part. For if he neglected to protect and defend his tenant; or did any thing that was prejudicial to him, or injurious to the feudal connexion; he forfeited his seignory. Thus it is said in the Liber Feudorum-Si dominus commisit feloniam, per quam Lib.2.Tit.26.. § 47. vassallus amitteret feudum, si eam commiserit in dominum, feudi proprietatem etiam dominus perdere debeat. 87. The feudal lord had not only a right to the Feudal service of his vassals in war; but had also the privi- Jurisdiction. lege of determining their disputes in time of peace. 2:55. Thus we read in the Liber Feudorum-Si inter duos Lib.1.Tit. 18. vassallos de feodo sit controversia, domini sit cognitio, et per eum controversia terminetur, Si vero inter dominum et vassallum lis oriatur, per pares curiæ a domino sub fidelitate debito conjuratos terminetur. Montesq. Hervé, V. 1. 88. The origin of the feudal jurisdiction is said to be derived from the following circumstances: By the laws of all the northern nations every crime, not Cha. 5. V.1. even excepting murder, was punished by a pecuniary Robertson's fine, which was called fredum. In the infancy of the northern governments, the chief occupation of a judge consisted in ascertaining and levying those fines; which formed a considerable part of the public revenue. When extensive tracts of land were granted as feuds, the privilege of levying those fines was always included in the grant; with a right to hold a court for the purpose of ascertaining them; from whence followed a jurisdiction over the vassals, both in civil and criminal matters. 89. To all the nations descended from the Germans, justice was originally distributed in their general assemblies: nor did the king or chieftain pronounce sentence till he had consulted those persons who were of the same rank with the accused; without whose consent no judgement could be given. 90. In imitation of this practice, every feudal lord had a court, in which he distributed justice to his vassals; and every freeman. who held lands of him was bound, under pain of forfeiting his feud, to attend his court, there to assist his lord in determining all disputes arising between his vassals. And as all the tenants were of the same rank, and held of the same lord, they were called pares curiæ. 91. In the Liber Feudorum, Lib. 2. Tit. . it is said-Si inter duos vassallos de feodo sit controversia, domini sit cognitio; et controversia per eum terminetur. And in a law of the Emperor Conrad is the following regulation-Si inter capitaneos controversia sit, coram rege finiatur; si inter valvasores, coram paribus curiæ. Muratori ant. Med. Ævi. 92. This practice appears to have been established so long ago as in the reign of the emperor Conrad I. A. D. 920, of whom there exists the following law-Statuimus ut nullus miles episcoporum, abba. tum, &c. vel omnium qui beneficium de nostris publicis v. 2. 287. beneficiis, aut de ecclesiarum prædiis, &c. tenent, &c. sine certa et convicta culpa, suum beneficium perdat, nisi secundum consuetudinem antecessorum nostrorum, et judicium parium. Introduction of Feuds. Spelman on 63. IT SECTION 1. T is now universally admitted that the feudal system, with its fruits and services, as established in Normandy, was first introduced into England by William the Conqueror, in those possessions which were granted by him to his followers; and that about the twentieth year of his reign the feudal system was formally and generally adopted. 2. In consequence of this event it became a fundamental maxim, or rather fiction of our law, that all real property was originally granted by the King, 1 Inst. 65. a. and held mediately or immediately of the crown, in Id. 1. b. consideration of certain services to be rendered by the tenant. The thing holden was therefore called a tenement; the possessors thereof tenants, the manner of their possession a tenure. And Lord Coke says, "In the law of England we have not properly allodium, that is, any subject's land that is not holden." edit. 1778. 3. Although feuds were not originally hereditary in those countries where the feudal law was first established, yet we find that feuds were, from the beginning, hereditary, where lands held by an allodial tenure were voluntarily converted into feuds. Thus Basnage, in his Commentary on the Customs of Nor- Tome 1. 153. mandy, says, that when Rollo became master of that province, he granted considerable portions of it to his companions, and to gentlemen of Britanny, as hereditary feuds; that he also recalled a number of the antient inhabitants, who had held their estates by hereditary right, and restored them to their possessions in as full and ample a manner as they had held them under the kings of France. 4. When William I. established himself in England, he certainly granted to his followers the inheritance of all the estates which he distributed to them; for some of those estates are possessed by their descendants at this day: and when he persuaded the Anglo-Saxon proprietors to hold their lands by a feudal tenure, he as certainly allowed them to retain the inheritance. 2 Comm. 60. 5. Sir W. Blackstone observes that there seem Division of Tenures. to have subsisted among our ancestors four principal species of lay tenures, to which all others may be reduced; the grand criteria of which were the natures of the several services or renders that were due to the lords from their tenants. The services in respect of their quality were either free or base; in respect to their quantity, and time of executing them, were either certain or uncertain. Free services were such as were not unbecoming the character of a soldier or a freeman to perform; as to serve under the lord in the wars, to pay a sum of money, and the like. Base services |