10. What is a law er post facto defined to be?

An ex post facto law is one which renders an act punishable in a manner in which it was not punishable when it was committed. Fletcher v. Peck, 6 Cranch, 87.

Ex post facto laws relate to criminal and penal proceedings which impose punishments or forfeitures, and not civil proceedings which affect private rights retrospectively.-1 Kent's Com., 409. Calder et ux. v. Bull. 3 Dall., 386. Green v. Biddle, 8 Wheaton, 89. Serg. Const. Law, 356.

Retrospective laws and state laws, divesting vested rights, unless er post facto or impairing the obligation of contracts, do not fall within the prohibition contained in the constitution of the United States, however repugnant they may be to sound legislation. Satterlee v. Mathewson, 2 Peters' S. C. Rep., 413. Watson v. Mercer, 8 Ibid., 88.

Almost every law providing a new remedy, affects and operates upon causes of action existing at the time the law is past; and this retrospective effect does not render a law ex post facto, or one impairing the obli gation of contracts. Sampeyreac v. The United States, 7 Peters' S. C. Rep. 222.

11. What is the general principle as to laws impairing the obligation of contracts?

The objection to a law on the ground of its impairing the obligation of a contract, can never depend upon the extent of the change which the law effects in it. Any deviation from its terms, by postponing or accelerating the period of performance which it prescribes, imposing conditions not expressed in the contracts, or dispensing with the performance of conditions, however minute or apparently immaterial in their effect upon the contract of the parties, impairs its obligation.-Donaldson v. Harvy, 3 Har. & McHen., 12.

A state law, establishing gaol liberties, has been held not to be within the prohibition contained in the constitution.-Holmes v. Lansing, 3 Johns. Cas., 73.

A state may pass a law whereby insolvent debtors shall be released from imprisonment or protected from arrest, on any action, for any debt or demand due by them. The right to imprison constitutes no part of the contract, and a discharge of the person of the party from imprisonment, does not impair the obligation of the contract, but leaves it in full force against his property and effects.-Beers et al. v. Houghton, 9 Peters, 329. Sturges v. Crowninshield, 4 Wheaton, 200. Mason v. Haile, 12 Wheat., 370. State laws cannot control the exercise of the powers of the national government, or in any manner limit or affect the operations of the process or the proceedings in the national courts.-Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheaton, 213. Wayman v. Southard, 10 Wheaton, 51. Beers et al. v. Houghton, 9 Peters' S. C. Rep, 359. The Bank of Hamilton v. Dudley's Heirs, 2 Peters' S. C. Rep., 524.

LEASE.

1. What is a lease?

A lease is properly a conveyance of any lands or tenements, (usually in consideration of rent or other annual recompense), made for life, for years, or at will, but always for a less time than the lessor hath in the premises.-Spel. Gloss., 229. Leases may endure so long as the interest of the lessor, but not longer.-Co. Litt., 44. 2 Black. Com., 318.

A lease for years is a contract between the lessor and the lessee. The lessor contracts that the lessee shall enjoy the land for a period of years, and the lessee agrees to render a rent, in money or other valuable things, at stated periods during the term. Rent is not essential to the contract.-12 Petersd. Abr., 93. Goods and chattels may also be demised for years. For the definition of a lease, see Thornton v. Payne, 5 Johns. Rep., 74. Hallett v. Hallett v. Wylie, 3 Johns. Rep., 44. Mickie v. Wood, 5 Rand. Rep., 571. Bradish v. Schenck, 1 Johns. Rep., 151. Hoskins v. Rhodes, 1 Gill & Johns. Rep., 266. Maverick v. Gibbs, 3 M'Cord's Rep., 211. The Farmers' Bank v. The Mutual Ins. Co. et al., 4 Leigh. Rep., 69. Roberts v. Jennel, 3 Monroe's Rep., 247.

2. Who may be a lessor and lessee?

All persons seised in fee simple, fee tail, for life or for years, of land may grant leases for any term commensurate with their respective interests. Executors and administrators may dispose of terms for years, in right of the testator.-12 Petersd. Abr., 102. Every tenant may make a subtenancy, and this without his landlord's consent.-Ibid.

A tenant at will can make no lease, neither can a tenant at sufferance. -Layton v. Field, 3 Salk., 222.

Infants and married women may take leases. An alien merchant, whose nation is at peace with this country, may take a lease. -2 Show., 135. 1 Saund., 6. 4 East, 103.

3. What is the general rule as to the tenant's right to assign his lease?

The lessee has a right to underlease, or even to cede his lease to another person, unless this power has been expressly interdicted.-—Lou. Civil Code, art. 2696. Barron v. Duncan, 6 Lou. Rep., 100. Norton v. Ormsby, 1 Mar. Lou. Rep., N. S., 375. Waters v. Banks, 10 Mar. Lou. Rep., 94. Mayor, &c., v. Duplesis, 5 Mar. Lou. Rep., 309.

The tenant may assign; and where there was a clause in the lease, for seven years, that the tenant should not assign over, or otherwise part with the indenture, or the premises thereby leased, or any part thereof, to any person, the tenant underlet part of the premises for the period of two years.

It was held that the under-lease did not come within the proviso which must be construed to mean an assignment of the premises, or part of them, for the whole term, and no forfeiture is incurred by letting for a

shorter period.-Jackson v. Harrison, 17 Johns. Rep., 66. Cruiscoe Bugby, 3 Wills., 234. Contra, 3 Durn. & East, 430. 5 Ibid., 467.

Where the lessee assigns his lease for a shorter period of time than that for which the lease was granted, the lessor cannot sustain an action of covenant against the assignee upon the lease.-Fulton v. Stuart, 2 Ham., 221.

Debt will lie by the assignee of the lessor against the assignee of the lessee.-Howland v. Coffin, 12 Mass. Rep., 125.

Where the lessee covenanted that if he, his executors, &c., should be minded to sell or dispose of their estate, it should be lawful to do so, first giving preemption to the lessor, his &c., and on every such sale or assignment should pay the lessor, his &c., a tenth part of the purchase money; otherwise the lease should cease. The lessee assigned and paid the tenth, and the assignee refused to pay it. Held, that the term "assigns" clearly embraces every purchaser upon a voluntary sale, as well as upon execution.-Jackson ex dem. Groat, 7 Cowen's Rep., 285. Jackson v. Silvernail, 15 Johns. Rep., 278. Jackson v. Shutz, 18 Johns. Rep.,

174.

After assignment the lessee continues liable for the acts of his assignee.-Brett v. Cumberland, Cro. Jac., 521. Bachelor v. Gage, Cro. Car., 188. Norton v. Arkland, Cro. Car., 580. Jackson v. Brownson, 7 Johns. Rep., 227.

4. What is the rule where buildings leased are accidentally destroyed, as by fire?

A lessee of buildings which are destroyed by fire has no relief either at law or equity, against an express covenant to pay rent, unless he has protected himself by a stipulation in the lease, or the landlord has covenanted to rebuild.-Gates v. Green, 4 Paige's Rep., 365. Lamott v. Sterrett, 1 Har. & John., 42. Patterson v. Ackerson, 1 Edw. Rep., 96. Leeds v. Cheetham, 1 Sim., 146. Harrison v. Murrell, 5 Monroe, 360. dem. Ellis & Medwin v. Sandham, 1 Durnford & East, 510. Pindar v. Amsby & Rutter, 1 Durnford & East, 312. Doe ex dem. Mitihinson v. Carter, 8 Durn. & East, 57.

If, during the lease, the thing be totally destroyed by any unforeseen event, or if taken for public purposes, the lease is at an end.-Lou. Code Civil, art. 2667. Poth. Cont. de Louage, No. 74. 2 Ib., No. 144 et 300. 6 Toul., 179. 7 lb., 529, 541. 7 lb., 529, 541. Norton v. Ormsby, 1 Mar. Lou. Rep., N. S., 375.

5. What is the rule as to the tenant's right to dispute the title of his landlord?

That a tenant cannot dispute the title of his lessor.-Attorney Genl. v. Lord Hotham, Tur. & Russ. 209. Berwick v. Thompson, 7 Durnford & East, 487. Peyton et al. v Stith, 5 Peters' S. C. Rep., 485. Willison v. Watkins, 3 Ib., 44. Hughs v. The Trustees of Clarksville, 6 Ib., 369. Woodward v. Brown, 13 lb., 1.

A tenant who disclaims his landlord's title is not entitled to notice suit.-Ib

It is a general rule that no tenant can dispute his landlord's title, but this rule is subject to certain exceptions. If a tenant disclaims the tenure and claims the fee in his own right, of which the landlord has notice, the relation of landlord and tenant is put an end to, and the tenant becomes a trespasser. Walden et al. v. Bodley, 14 Ibid., 156.

The lease of a tenant for life, with power to under-lease, must strictly follow the conditions of the power; and if it vary from them in the interest demised, or in the rent reserved, it cannot be supported against the remainder-man.-Pultney v. Lady Cavan, 5 Durn. & East, 567. Bowes v. Lon. Water Works Co., Jacobs' Rep., 324: and the lease is not capable of being confirmed by the remainder-man.-Doe ex dem. Martin v. Watts, 7 Durn. & East, 83.

6. What is the rule as to the obligations of one who enters upon land without the consent of the owner?

He is bound for rents on the improvements, even those made by himself after entry, and if allowed for improvements at all, can only set them off against the rent.-Hawkins v. King, 1 Monroe Rep., 162.

7. What is the effect of a judgment of eviction against a tenant?

It destroys the relationship between him and his landlord; and the tenant may then, without waiting for the ha. fa. to be executed, purchase any other title for his benefit.-Gore v. Stevens, 1 Dana's Rep., 203.

A covenant on the part of the lessor to renew the lease for years at the expiration of the term, is a covenant running with the land.-Pigot v. Mason, 1 Paige, 412.

Covenants of warranty and to convey, contained in the lease of real estate, run with the land, and are binding upon the heirs and assignees of the lessor.-Vanhorn v. Crane, 1 Paige, 455.

A subsequent purchase by the lessor of an outstanding claim against the premises, will enure to the benefit of the lessee, by virtue of the covenant of warranty. The same result follows where the purchase is made by the assignee of the lessor.-Ibid.

A. leased to B. for twenty years, with liberty to B. to surrender the lease at any time before the expiration of the term, on paying of five shillings. A. devised the rents during the lease, to his five daughters, and the fee simple afterwards to his son P., who sold to B., who surrendered the lease. Held this surrender should not disappoint the daughters' legacies; but B. was decreed to pay the rents.-Graham v. Woodson, 3 Call. Rep., 249.

8. What is implied by a covenant to renew a lease?

A covenant to renew a lease, implies another lease for the same term and rent, but not with all the covenants contained in the former lease, such covenants being incidental, and not essential parts of the lease. -Rutgers v. Hunter, 6 Johns. Chan. Rep., 215.

9. What is the rule where a leasehold interest is assigned by way of mortgage?

That unless there be a special provision to the contrary, the assignee takes the interest, subject to all the covenants and obligations of the original lessee. Haig v. Homan, 4 Bligh, N. S., 380.

A testator bequeathed a church lease for twenty-one years to A. for life, remainder to his first and other sons, and directed the lease to be continually renewed by the person in possession for the time being. A. neglected to renew, and the lease expired in 1798; his eldest son attained twenty-one in 1800; in 1830 A. died; in 1831 the eldest son filed his bill, praying to be compensated for the loss of the lease out of A.'s assets: Held that he was entitled to relief, notwithstanding the lapse of time.— Bennet v. Colley, 2 Sim., 181.

10. How far is an assignee of a lease liable?

He is only liable in respect to his possession, and not for rent in arrear before his title accrued.-Farmer's Bank v. Mutual Insurance Socy. et al., 4 Leigh's Rep., 69.

11. What is the rule in the construction of a lease as to boundaries ? That artificial boundaries must prevail over courses.-Hall et al. v. Powell, 4 Serg. & Rawle, 456. Shaw v. Clements, 1 Call's Rep., 438. Bastin v. Christie, Taylor's Rep., 116. Baker's Lessee v. Glascock, 1 Hen. & Mun. Rep., 177. Bennet v. Bittle et al., 4 Rawle's Rep., 339.

A covenant to bear, pay, and discharge all taxes, charges and impositions, which should be taxed, charged, imposed or assessed, upon the demised premises, extends to a tax assessed for paving the street.-The Mayor of New York v. Cushman, 10 Johns. Rep., 96. Oswald v. Girfert, 11 Johns. Rep., 443. Bleecker v. Ballou, 3 Wendell, 263.

A tenant who has refused to quit the premises will not be condemned to pay more than the rent agreed upon, without damages be proved. Roderiguez v. Combs, 6 Martin's Lou. Rep., 275.

A verbal lease of anterior date, accompanied with possession, will prevail over a written lease of immoveable property.-Rachel v. Pearsall, 8 Mar. Lou. Rep., 702.

If, on a lease for years, the tenant abandons the premises, the landlord may demand the rent for the whole term.-Christy_v. Casanave, 2 Mar. Lou. Rep., N. S. 451. Dig., lib. 19, tit. 2, 1. 24. Febrero, p. 1, C 6, Sec. 1, No. 11.

The lien of a landlord is of a higher nature than the claim of the United States on custom house bonds.-Jackson v. Odie, 2 Mar. Lou Rep., N. S., 555.

12. How may a lease be determined?

By the expiration of the term, by merger, by surrender, or by forfeiture.-4 Kent's Comm., 99.

13. In what cases does a merger take place?

When the term meets another term immediately expectant thereon