because tenant in tail could not execute an estate without wrong; but that since the statute is quite taken away, because the statute saveth no right of intail, as the statute of 1 R. III. did; and that reason likewise might have been answered before the statute, in regard of the common recovery.

A feme covert and an infant, though under years of discretion, may be seised to a use; for as well as land might descend unto them from a feoffee to use, so may they originally be infeoffed to a use; yet if it be before the statute, and they had, upon a subpana brought, executed their estate during the coverture or infancy, they might have defeated the same; and when they should have been seised again to the use, and not to their own use; but since the statute no right is saved unto them.

If a feme covert or an infant be infeoffed to a use precedent since the statute, the infant or baron come too late to discharge or root up the feoffment; but if an infant be infeoffed to the use of himself and hisheirs, and I. D. pay such a sum of money to the use of I. G. and his heirs, the infant may disagree and overthrow the contingent use.

Contrary law, if an infant be infeoffed to the use of himself for life, the remainder to the use of I. S. and his heirs, he may disagree to the feoffment as to his own estate, but not to divest the remainder, but itshall remain to the benefit of him in remainder.

And yet if an attainted person be infeoffed to a use, the king's title, after office found, shall prevent the use, and relate above it; but until office the cestuy que use is seised of the land.

Like law of an alien; for if land be given to an alien to a use, the use is not void ab initio: yet neither alien or attainted person can maintain an action to defend the land.

The king's villain if he be infeoffed to a use, the king's title shall relate above the use; otherwise in case of a common person.

But if the lord be infeoffed to the use of his villain, the use neither riseth, but the lord is in by the common law, and not by the statute discharged of the use.

But if the husband be infeoffed to the use of his wife for years, if he die the wife shall have the term, and it shall not inure by way of discharge, although the husband may dispose of the wife's term.

So if the lord of whom the land is held be infeoffed to the use of a person attainted, the lord shall not hold by way of discharge of the use, because of the king's title, annum, diem et vastum.

A person uncertain is not within the statute, nor any estate in nubibus or suspense executed; as if I give land to I. S. the remainder to the right heirs of I. D. to the use of I. N. and his heirs, I. N. is not seised of the fee-simple of an estate pour vie of I. S. till I. D. be dead, and then in fee-simple.

Like law, if before the statute I give land to I. S. pour autre vie to a use, and I. S. dieth, living cestuy que use, whereby the freehold is in suspense, the statute cometh, and no occupant entereth: the use is not executed out of the freehold in suspense for the occupant, the disseisor, the lord by escheat. The feoffee upon consideration, not having notice, and all other persons which shall be seised to use, not in regard of their persons but of their title; I refer them to my division touching disturbance and interruption of uses.

It followeth now to see what person may be a cestuy que use. The king may be cestuy que use; but it behoveth both the declaration of the use, and the conveyance itself, to be matter of record, because the king's title is compounded of both; I say, not appearing of record, but by conveyance of record. And therefore if I covenant with I. S. to levy a fine to him to the king's use, which I do accordingly; and this deed of covenant be not inrolled, and the deed be found by office, the use vesteth not. E converso, if inrolled. If I covenant with I. S. to infeoff him to the king's use, and the deed be inrolled, and the feoffment also be found by office, the use vesteth.

But if I levy a fine, or suffer a recovery to the king's use, and declare the use by deed of covenant inrolled, though the king be not party, yet it is good enough.

A corporation may take a use, and yet it is not

material whether the feoffment or the declaration be by deed; but I may infeoff I. S. to the use of a corporation, and this use may be averred.

A use to a person uncertain is not void in the first limitation, but executeth not till the person be in esse ; so that this is positive, that a use shall never be in abeyance as a remainder may be, but ever in a person certain upon the words of the statute, and the estate of the feoffees shall be in him or them which have the The reason is, because no confidence can be reposed in a person unknown and uncertain; and therefore if I make a feoffment to the use of I. S. for life, and then to the use of the right heirs of I. D. the remainder is not in abeyance, but the reversion is in the feoffor, quousque. So that upon the matter all

persons uncertain in use, are like conditions or limitations precedent.

Like law, if I infeoff one to the use of I. S. for years, the remainder to the right heirs of I. D. this is not executed in abeyance, and therefore not void.

Like law, if I make a feoffment to the use of my wife that shall be, or to such persons as I shall maintain, though I limit no particular estate at all; yet the use is good, and shall in the interim return to the feoffor.

Contrary law, if I once limit the whole fee-simple of the use out of land, and part thereof to a person uncertain, it shall never return to the feoffor by way of fraction of the use: but look how it should have gone unto the feoffor; if I begin with a contingent use, so it shall go to the remainder; if I intail a contingent use, both estates are alike subject to the contingent use when it falleth; as when I make a feoffment in fee to the use of my wife for life, the remainder to my first begotten son; I having no son at that time, the remainder to my brother and his heirs: if my wife die before I have any son, the use shall not be in me, but in my brother. And yet if I marry again, and have a son, it shall divest from my brother, and be in my son, which is the skipping they talk so much of.

So if I limit a use jointly to two persons, not in esse,

and the one cometh to be in esse, he shall take the entire use; and yet if the other afterward come in esse, he shall take jointly with the former; as if I make a feoffment to the use of my wife that shall be, and my first begotten son for their lives, and I marry; my wife taketh the whole use, and if I afterwards have a son, he taketh jointly with my wife.

But yet where words of abeyance work to an estate executed in course of possession, it shall do the like in uses; as if I infeoff A to the use of B for life, the remainder to C for life, the remainder to the right heirs of B, this is a good remainder executed.

So if I infeoff A to the use of his right heirs, A is in the fee-simple, not by the statute, but by the common law.

Now are we to examine a special point of the disability of such persons as do take by the statute: and that upon the words of the statute, where divers persons are seised to the use of other persons; so that by the letter of the statute, no use is contained: but where the feoffor is one, and cestuy que use is another.

Therefore it is to be seen in what cases the same persons shall be both seised to the use and cestuy que use, and yet in by the statute; and in what cases they shall be diverse persons, and yet in by the common law; wherein I observe unto you three things: First, that the letter is full in the point. Secondly, that it is strongly urged by the clause of joint estates following. Thirdly, that the whole scope of the statute was to remit the common law, and never to intermeddle where the common law executed an estate; therefore the statute ought to be expounded, that where the party seised to the use, and the cestuy que use is one person, he never taketh by the statute, except there be a direct impossibility or impertinency for the use, to take effect by the common law.

And if I give land to I. S. to the use of himself and his heirs, and if I. D. pay a sum of money, then to the use of I. D. and his heirs, I. S. is in of an estate for life, or for years, by way of abridgment of estate in course of possession, and I. D. in of the fee-simple by the statute.

So if I bargain and sell my land after seven years, the inheritance of the use only passeth; and there remains an estate for years by a kind of subtraction of the inheritance or occupier of my estate, but merely at the common law.

But if I infeoff I. S. to the use of himself in tail, and then to the use of I. D. in fee, or covenant to stand seised to the use of myself in tail, and to the use of my wife in fee; in both these cases the estate tail is executed by this statute; because an estate tail cannot be re-occupied out of a fee-simple, being a new estate, and not like a particular estate for life or years, which are but portions of the absolute fee; and therefore if I bargain and sell my land to I. S. after my death without issue, it doth not leave an estate tail in me, nor vesteth any present fee in the bargain, but is an use expectant.

So if I infeoff I. S. to the use of I. D. for life, and then to the use of himself and his heirs, he is in of the fee-simple merely in course of possession, and as of a reversion, and not of a remainder.

Contrary law, if I infeoff I. S. to the use of I. D. for life, then to the use of himself for life, the remainder to the use of I. N. in fee: Now the law will not admit fraction of estates; but I. S. is in with the rest by the

statute.

So if I infeoff I. S. to the use of himself and a stranger, they shall be both in by the statute, because they could not take jointly, taking by several titles.

Like law, if I infeoff a bishop and his heirs to the use of himself, and his successors, he is in by the statute in the right of his see.

And as I cannot raise a present use to one out of his own seisin; so if I limit a contingent or future use to one being at the time of limitation not seised, but after become seised at the time of the execution of the contingent use, there is the same reason and the same law, and upon the same difference which I have put before.

As if I covenant with my son, that after his marriage I will stand seised of land to the use of himself