grant, by claim; that which passeth by way of charge, determineth by way of discharge. And so a use, which is raised but by declaration or limitation, may cease by words of declaration or limitation, as the civil law saith; in his magis consentaneum est ut iisdem modis res dissolvantur quibus constituantur." mence in futuro. 29. If an estate had been limited at common law Might comto a man, and to such woman as he should afterwards marry, the man would have taken the whole; because 1 Rep. 101 a. a freehold estate could not be created to commence in futuro. But the limitation of a use in this manner would have been good. So if a man had made a Id. 135 a. feoffment to the use of one for years, and after to the Tit. 16. c. 4. use of the right heirs of J. S., this limitation had been good. vocable. 30. It was determined upon the same principles, Were rethat a power of revocation might be annexed to the limitation of a use; by which means the grantor 1 Inst. 237 a. might at any future time revoke the uses he had de- 3 Cha. Ca. clared, and limit new uses to other persons; which the feoffee to uses was bound to execute. 66. 31. A use not being considered as an estate in the Not an land, was not an object of tenure; and was there- Object of fore freed from all those oppressive burthens which were introduced into England by the Normans, as Tenure. consequences of the feudal system. Thus if a cestui Dissert. c. 2. que use was attainted of treason or felony, the use § 23, &c. was not forfeited, either to the king or to the lord of the fee; because a use was not held of any person. Therefore in some general acts of parliament relating to treason, as that of 21 Rich. II. c. 3. and in most particular acts of attainder passed after that time, there was a special provision made, that the persons attainted should forfeit all lands whereof they, or any to their use, were seised. In most of 1 Inst. 76 b. those acts provision was also made to save from forfeiture such lands whereof the persons attainted were seised to the use of others. 32. In the same manner if a cestui que use died, leaving a son or a daughter within age, the lord had not the wardship or marriage of the heir, or a relief on the death of the ancestor : nor could he claim the lands as an escheat, on the death of the cestui que use without heirs. 33. After the ecclesiastics had been restrained by the statute 15 Rich. II. c. 5. from acquiring the use of lands, it might be supposed that the practice of conveying lands to uses would have ceased; but it was soon found that this was the most effectual mode of evading the hardships of the feudal tenures; and also of securing estates from forfeiture for high treaSo that during the contests between the houses of York and Lancaster, as it was the constant prac1 Inst. 272 a. tice to attaint the vanquished, almost all the lands in England were conveyed to uses. Not subject to Dower or Curtesy. Tit. 5 & 6. Tit. 7. c. 1. Not Extendible, or Assets. 34. Another circumstance attending a use was, that the husband or wife of a cestui que use could neither be tenant by the curtesy, nor tenant in dower of the use, because the cestui que use had no legal seisin of the land. This was a grievance much complained of; therefore it became customary, when most estates in the kingdom were vested in feoffees to uses, to settle some estate, before marriage, on the husband and wife for their lives; which, as we have seen, gave rise to the modern jointure. 35. A use was not extendible, because there was no process at common law but against legal estates; i Rep. 121 b. for uses were mere creatures of equity; so that 1 Inst. 374 b. many persons conveyed their lands to uses, for the purpose of defrauding their creditors: and as a use was neither a chattel nor an hereditament, it was not assets to executors, or to the heir. Read. 20. 36. Uses were devisable, although at that time lands Devisable. were not; and Lord Bacon observes, that one of the 1 Rep. 123 b. reasons why so much land was conveyed to uses was, because persons acquired by that means a power of disposing of their property by will; which enabled them to make a much better provision for their families, than they could otherwise have done. 37. One of the first cases in the year books respecting uses was this:-A woman who had made a feoffment to uses, afterwards married, and by her will directed that her feoffees should convey the legal estate to her husband. It was adjudged that the Mich. 18 Edw. 4. will was void at law, being made by a feme covert; therefore should also be void in Chancery. 38. There was, however, one instance in which the Descendible. Bac.Read.11. Court of Chancery followed the rules of the common 1 Inst. 14 b. law in cases of uses; for it was held that they descended in the same manner as legal estates, the doctrine of the half blood was allowed to take place, and even local customs were left unviolated in this instance; for where a cestui que use of lands held in Tit. 29. gavelkind or borough english died, leaving several sons, the use descended either to all of them, or to the youngest, according to the custom. 39. So where a person seised ex parte maternă 2 Roll. Ab. made a feoffment to uses, the use descended to the 780. heirs ex parte materna, in the same manner as the legal estate would have done. Uses. 40. Thus stood the doctrine of uses, as regulated Inconveand settled by the Court of Chancery; in this state niences of it was in some instances applied to very useful purposes, by removing the restraints on alienation, and enabling the proprietors of real property to exercise Statutes made to remedy them. several powers over it, which were not allowed by the rules of the common law. But uses became so general, and were applied to such bad purposes, that at length they were productive of very great grievances. Feoffments to uses were usually made in a secret manner; so that where a person had cause to sue for land, he could not find out the legal tenant, against whom he was to bring his præcipe; widows were de prived of their dower, husbands of their curtesy; creditors were defrauded, the king and the other feudal lords lost the profits of their tenures; their wardships, marriages, and reliefs; and an universal obscurity and confusion of titles prevailed; by which means purchases for valuable consideration were frequently defeated. 41. As a remedy for these inconveniences, several statutes were made to subject uses to the same rules as real estates. By the statute 50 Edw. III. it was enacted, that where persons conveyed their tenements to their friends by collusion, to have the profits at their will, their creditors should have execution of such tenements, as if no such gifts had been made. Two other statutes of the same kind were made, 1 Rich. II. c. 9. and 2 Rich. II. stat. 2. c. 3. 42. By the statute 1 Rich. III. c. 1. reciting that by privy and unknown feoffments, great insecurity, trouble, costs, and grievous vexations daily grew; it was enacted, that all acts and conveyances made by persons having only the use of lands, should be good and effectual, not only against the persons making such acts, but also against all persons having or claiming any estate or interest in the same, to the use of those who should make such acts. 43. By the statute 1 Hen. VII., reciting that whereas divers of the king's subjects, having cause of action by formedon, &c., were defrauded and delayed of their said actions, and oftentimes without remedy, because of feoffments made of the same lands and tenements to persons unknown, &c.; it was enacted, that the demandant, in every such case, should have his action against the pernor or pernors of the profits of the lands or tenements demanded, whereof any person or persons had been enfeoffed to his or their use. 44. By the statute 4 Hen. VII. c. 17. it was enacted, that if any person or persons should be seised of any estate of inheritance, being tenant immediate to the lords of any castles, &c. holden by knight-service, to the use of any other person or persons, and of his heirs only, and he to whose use he or they were so seised dieth, his heir being within age, no will by him declared, nor made in his life touching the premises; the lord of whom such castles, &c. were holden immediately, should have a writ of right of ward, as well for the body as for the land, as the lord should have had if the same ancestor had been in possession of the estate, so being in use at the time of his death, and no such estate to his use made and that if any such heir was of full age at the death of his ancestor, to pay relief as his ancestor, whose heir he was, would have paid if he had been in possession of that estate, so being in use at the time of his death, and no such estate to his use made or had. 45. By the statute 19 Hen. VII. c. 15. it was enacted, that it should be lawful for every sheriff, or other officer to whom any writ or precept should be directed, at the suit of any person or persons, to have execution of any lands, tenements, or other heredita |