objection, against raising an use from the seisin of the king or corporation, so as to give an estate, admitting of enlargement. That the doctrine may not be carried further than it ought to be, it will be proper to add, that an attainted person or alien, and also a corporation, may be a cestui que use; consequently they may receive an use, though they are as to the corporation altogether; and as to the attainted person, and alien sub modo, disqualified, or incapacitated from standing seised to an use, on a conveyance to them. From these deductions, it is easy to arrive at the conclusion, a conclusion well warranted by law, that a conveyance to a corporation, or an attainted person, or an alien by lease and release, is free from objection. In these instances, the use arises from the seisin of the grantor; and he may be seised to an use, and the corporation, the attainted person, or the alien is capable of the use. But if uses should be declared of the estate passed to them by the release, then the objection will recur, that though the release is good, and well warranted and supported by the lease; the uses declared on the release are open to the objection, that the corporation, or as against the lord or the crown, the attainted person or the alien, cannot be seised to an use.

影

2dly, In respect of estate.

That a man may be seised to an use, he must have or take an estate of freehold.(w) That estate alone gives a seisin; it follows that tenant for life, or tenant in fee, may make a bargain and sale for years, or for any estate co-extensive with or less than the estate of the grantor. By seisin is to be understood, not only the interest, but also the state of the title. A man who is disseised, or whose estate is discontinued, has not any seisin it follows that he cannot stand seised to an use. He must restore his seisin by entry or claim, before he can acquire the ability of conveying by lease and release.(r)

In the old books it is supposed that tenant in tail cannot stand seised to an use. In every day's experience it occurs, that tenants in tail convey by lease, being a bargain and sale for a year, and release; or by bargain and sale alone to another and his heirs ;(y) and no doubt is entertained of the validity of either species of assurance, as good against him, and voidable only, and not void as against his issue. Even his covenant to stand seised to an use, will operate except

(w) Jenk. Cent. 195. pl. 1.

(v) Gilb. Uses, 205. Jenk. 5 Cent. c. 1. 3 Bulstr. 184. y) Seymour's case, 10 Rep. 95.

under particular circumstances. The excepted case is a covenant by tenant in tail to stand seised to uses, to commence in terms, after his death.(z) As such uses interfere with the better title of the issue, the use will not arise, at least as against them. Should the tenant in tail alien, and bind his issue, it is a question for consideration, whether the use may not arise. The objection will be quod ab initio, non valet, tractu temporis non convalebit. The elaborate judgment of Lord Chief Justice Holt in Machel v. Clark, (a) contains the leading and more material points, respecting alienations by tenant in tail.

The doctrine that tenant in tail could not stand seised to an use, raised the question whether he could receive a conveyance, of which uses could be declared. After much discussion on this point, the result is, that no use will be implied in a conveyance to a man, as tenant in tail. As he takes a particular estate, and for a special purpose, the law will imply the use in his favor, and no use will result.(b) But when a conveyance is made to a person as tenant in tail, upon an use which is expressed, the statute will

(z) Lord Raym. 781.

(a) Lord Raym. 781.

(b) Cooper v. Franklin, Cro, J. 400.

execute this use into estate. (c) These latter points, it will occur, are material to the consideration of the operation, and effect of the release; and not of the mode in which the lease and release, as parts of the same assurance, derive their efficacy. They concern the uses declared on the release, and have no application to the lease for a year, as the foundation for the release. It It may also be called to recollection from the passages in a former volume,. that tenant in tail who levies a fine, or suffers a recovery without declaring any use, will have a fee, and not his old intail, by resulting use.

In the further consideration and investigation of the points, under this and the former division, let the reader carefully distinguish between those cases in which the question is, whether the seisin, whicha person already has, can be subjected to an use, while the estate remains with him, and whether he can receive a conveyance to uses, or can make a conveyance to uses,

There are three classes of cases; under the first, we may rank those of

The king.

Queen regent.
Queen consort.
Corporation.

(c) Godbolt, 269. Buc. on Uses, 57.

And no use can be given them, so as to charge their seisin with an use, and consequently they cannot convey by a bargain and sale for a year, and a release grounded on the same. On this point, there was some distinction respecting villeins, &c. which is no longer material.

2dly, They and various other persons, as tenants in tail may take a conveyance to uses, which will be executed by the statute as against them, but as against other persons having paramount titles affecting the seisin, as in the case of attainder, alienage, issue in tail, &c. the conveyance will be good; and the uses will, as against the lord, &c. be void.

3dly, All these persons, and all other persons who are competent to convey, either absolutely or as against themselves, &c. can make a conveyance to uses; and the uses will be good, till the conveyance shall be avoided.

The two last points embrace considerations peculiar to the uses declared by the release, independent of the effect of the lease and release, as parts of the same assurance.

To understand with precision, the learning applicable to this sub-division, it will be proper to take a comprehensive view of the general doctrine of the common law, respecting releases in enlargement of

an estate.

It is on this doctrine that the assurance