4 Rep. 22 b. Gilb. Ten. 292. infra, c. 5. Upon voluntary Grants. Co. Cop. $56. 4 Rep. 22 b. Cro. Ja. 103. Upon Ad mission of Tenant 2. The lord is not however entitled to a fine upon a descent, till the heir is admitted: if the heir refuses to come in and accept his ancestor's copyhold, the Lord cannot compel him, but may seize the estate to his own use. The death of the heir, or an alienation made by him before admittance, will not however deprive the lord of his fine. 3. If a lord of a manor, having a copyhold by escheat or forfeiture, or other means, makes a voluntary admittance to it, which implies a grant, he becomes entitled to a fine from the new tenant. 4. Where a man acquires a copyhold by the custom of curtesy; or a woman acquires a copyhold by the by the Cur- custom of free bench; a fine is payable in some manors on the admittance of these tenants, and in others not. tesy or in Free Bench. Upon Aliena tion. 5. As the power of alienating copyholds was originally derived from the bounty of the lord, who is still a party to every alienation, by admitting the Tit. 37. c. alienee to become his tenant, a fine was paid to the lord; from which arose a general custom, that a fine was due to the lord upon every alienation of a copyhold. 1 Inst. 59 b. Drury v. 1 Atk. 95. 6. These fines are preserved by the 6th section of the statute 12 Cha. II. c. 24; by which it is provided, that nothing in that act shall take away any fines for alienation due by particular customs of ticular manors and places. par 7. The assignees of a bankrupt must be admitted, and are consequently subject to the payment of a fine. Lord Hardwicke has therefore recomended it Vide5 Geo. 2. to commissioners of bankrupts to except copyholds out of the assignment of the bankrupt's estate, as it would save two fines. For the commissioners might convey to the purchaser in the first instanee. c. 30. § 26. Devise, 8. Where a copyhold is devised, the devisee must Upon a be admitted, and is subject to the payment of a fine. The executor of a devisee for years of a copyhold, claiming under the testator, must also be admitted, and pay a fine. Bath v. 1 Burr. 206. 9. Henry Grey having a copyhold estate, devised Earl of it to John Taylour and Arthur Lake, their executors Abney, and administrators, for 99 years, if three persons should so long live; after the death of the testator, Taylour and Lake were admitted, and paid a fine of 2801. Taylour survived Lake and died, having appointed Doctor John Taylour his executor. The question was, whether he was obliged to be admitted, and to pay a fine. A case being sent out of Chancery for the opinion of the Court of King's Bench, it was certified that the executor of the surviving trustee ought to come in and be admitted, and pay a fine. from Remainder Brown's 10. By the general custom of copyholds, the ad- Not due mittance of a tenant for life is an admittance of the persons in remainder; therefore no fine is due from men. the remainder-men. For although there is an altera- Case, tion of the tenant, yet there is no alteration of the 4 Rep. 22, estate; the fine not being assessed for the particular 504. estate, but for the whole inheritance. Cro. Eliz. 1 Mod. 102. 1 Burr. 212. 11. The father being seised of a copyhold estate, surrendered it to the use of himself and his wife for Barnes their lives, remainder to his son in tail. The father v. Corke, 3 Lev. 308. and mother were admitted, and paid a fine; being both dead, the son prayed to be admitted to the remainder, which was done, and a fine of 581. set upon him; which he refused to pay, alleging that none was due, he being admitted by the admittance of his father and mother. It was adjudged, that no fine was due, unless there was a special custom for it. Auncelme v. Without a special Custom. 4 Rep. 23 a. Blackburn v. Graves, 12. A copyholder of inheritance surrendered to the use of his wife for life, remainder to his youngest son in fee. The wife was admitted, but the son refused to be admitted during his mother's life. Afterwards without being admitted, he surrendered to the use of the plaintiff in the lifetime of his mother. It was adjudged, that the admittance of the wife was the admittance of the son, in remainder: for she being admitted to the particular estate, the remainder depended on that, and vested without other admittance; for both made but one estate. ; 13. In some manors fines are due, by particular custom, on the admittance of persons in remainder but even in this case the admittance of the tenant for life is said to be the admittance of the person in 1 Mod. 120. remainder, but not to prejudice the lord of his fine; to which he may be entitled by the particular custom of the manor. And it was held, in the following modern case, that a custom requiring a remainder man, coming into possession on the death of a tenant for life, to be admitted, and to pay a fine, was good. Doe v. 14. E. Jenney was admitted in 1749 to certain 5 East, 522. copyhold estates in fee, upon whose admission a full fine was paid. In the year 1765 he surrendered the lands to the use of himself for life, remainder to the defendant, then Ann Brook, spinster, for life, with divers remainders over. On the 10th of April 1766, E. Jenney was admitted tenant of these lands, to hold to himself for life, according to the form and effect of the said surrender by the rod, at the will of the lord, according to the custom of the manor, by the rents and services therefore due and accustomed, saving every person's right. No fine was paid by E. Jenney on his admission in 1766 as tenant for life, under the marriage settlement, or assessed or paid in respect to the remainders. In August 1801, E. Jenney, the tenant for life, died; the defendant (his widow) was called on to be admitted; thereupon she appeared at a court baron of the manor, and offered to swear her fealty, or have it respited; but refused to be admitted, insisting that she was the lord's tenant by virtue of the surrender and admittance of her husband. The question was, whether the lord might seise the copyhold on account of this breach of the custom. The jury having found, that by the custom of the manor, when a person who had been admitted tenant for life of a copyhold estate, holden of the manor, died, the tenant in remainder, whether for life, in tail, or in fee, should come in to be admitted, and pay a fine thereon. The Court held the custom good. 15. A fine is only due as a consideration for the admittance of a new tenant; therefore, where there is no alteration of the tenant, no fine is due. Nor unless there is an the Tenant. $56. 16. Thus, if a copyholder surrenders for life, re- Co. Cop. serving the reversion to himself, and the tenant for life dies, the surrenderor may enter without paying a fine, because the reversion was never out of him. 17. So if a copyholder grants his estate to a stranger Idem. upon condition, and afterwards enters for the condition broken, he is not liable to the payment of a fine, because he comes in of his old estate. 18. A covenant or agreement to surrender a copy- Or on an Agreement hold will not entitle the lord to demand a fine from to surrender. the person with whom such covenant or agreement is made, unless he demands to be admitted. v. Lord of 19. One Benham, a copyholder of the manor of The King Hendon, covenanted to surrender to Goodrich; Hendon, which covenant the homage presented at the lord's 2 Term Rep. 484. Only due on Co. Cop. $56. Idem. court, and the consideration money was paid; but no surrender was ever made to him. Goodrich then assigned his interest in the copyhold to one Rankin, who claimed to be admitted. The lord of the manor resisted the application, on the ground that no fine had ever been paid him for the conveyance to Goodrich; that this was a mode of cheating him of his fines; that therefore, before Rankin was admitted, he ought to pay both the fines that were due. The Court said, that all the lord had a right to require was, to have a tenant; in this case he had one during the whole time; that any private agreement between Benham and Goodrich, not followed up by a surrender of the estate, could not give the lord of the manor a right to a fine, notwithstanding it was presented by the homage. 20. A fine being only due on the admittance of a new tenant, it follows, that where a person who acquires an interest in a copyhold is not obliged, from the nature of that interest, to be admitted tenant to the lord, he is not subject to the payment of a fine. 21. Thus, if a person marries a woman having a copyhold, though an interest becomes thereby vested in him, yet as he is not seised jure proprio, but only jure alieno, he is not obliged to be admitted; therefore is not liable to the payment of a fine. 22. It is the same if a married woman be a termor of a copyhold; for though the term becomes vested in the husband by the marriage, so that he may disTit. 8. c. 1. pose of it if he pleases, yet he is only possessed of it in right of his wife. $ 28. Idem. 23. Where by the custom of a manor the bailiff is to have the wardship of the heir of a copyholder, he shall not be admitted, or pay a fine; because he is |