Page:The English Reports v1 1900.pdf/963

within the same, by copy of court roll for three lives, and upon such fines as they thought fit.

Thomas Serjeant, alias Hughes, and Ann his daughter, who had married Thomas Horton, being seised of a messuage and the lands thereto belonging, called Penny Land and Pinfold Land, lying in Yardly Gobion, within the said manor, which had been formerly demised or granted by copy of court roll for three lives, and one of them being dead, the said 'Thomas Serjeant and Ann his daughter, at a Court Baron held for the said manor, on the 10th of February 1672, surrendered the said premises into the hands of the Queen, to the intent that the said Thomas Serjeant, and Thomas Horton and Ann his wife, might have the same to the use of them for their lives, and the life of the longer liver of them successively, according to the custom of the said manor; and at the same court they were admitted tenants accordingly, to hold for the said three lives, at the will of the lord, according to the custom of the manor, by fealty, suit of court, and the yearly rent of £1 13s. 4d. and a fine of £25 was paid, for adding the life of the said Thomas Horton in the copy.

In October 1675 Thomas Serjeant died, whereupon Thomas Horton came into possession; and at a Court Baron held for the same manor, on the 3d of August 1676, Horton and his wife surrendered the premises into the hands of the Queen, to the intent that they, and John their son, might have the same to the use of them the said Thomas Horton and Ann his wife, and of John their son, for their lives, and the life of the longer liver of them successively, according to the custom of the manor; and at the same court they were admitted tenants accordingly, and paid a fine of $10 for adding the life of the said John Horton in the copy.

[285] Ann Horton died in 1682; in October 1719 Thomas her husband died; and John Horton, who was the last life in the copy, died in May. 1723; upon whose death, the premises reverted and of right belonged to the appellant, as lord of the manor, and therefore he delivered an ejectment to recover the possession.

In Trinity term 1723 the respondent, as son and heir of the said John Horton, exhibited his bill in Chancery, against the appellant; stating, inter alia, that within the said manor there are, and time immemorial have been, several lands and tenements, held of the lords and ladies of the said manor for the time being, by copy of court roll, which, time out of mind, have been granted, or grantable by the said lords or ladies, to three persons for their lives, and the life of the survivor of them successively, upon the surrender, and at the instance or nomination of any tenant or tenants thereof, into the hands of the said lords or ladies, to the intent, that any three persons in and by such surrender or surrenders nominated, should have the same out of the hands of the said lords or ladies; and that such three persons so nominated, have been and ought thereupon to be admitted, or the same to them granted, paying to the lords or ladies of the manor for the time being, a reasonable fine for the same.—That for time immemorial, by the custom of the said manor, when, and so often as it hath happened that all the persons named in any such copies have died, without making any new nomination of other person or persons, then the heir or heirs at law of the survivor of such persons hath nominated, or have right to nominate three persons, to whom the lords or ladies of the manor for the time being have granted such copyhold tenements, for the lives of such three persons, and the survivor of them; and they have been accordingly admitted thereto, paying a reasonable fine for the same, according to the custom of the said manor.—The respondent then stated, that as heir at law of the said John Horton his father, he had a right to nominate three lives or persons, to whom the premises should be granted; that he bad applied to the appellant to admit three persons to the said premises, for their lives, and the life of the longer liver successively; and that he was ready to nominate three such lives, and to observe the custom of the said manor, and pay the usual fine and fees, heriot and other duties incumbent on him; but that the appellant had refused to make any such grant or admittance: and therefore the bill prayed, that the appellant might be obliged to admit the respondent, and such other two persons as he should nominate, to the said premises, upon his paying the customary fine and fees, and performing such duties and services as were incumbent upon him by the custom of the said manor; and that an injunction might be awarded, to stay the appellant's proceedings at law.

The appellant, by his answer to this bill, insisted, that there was not any custom