case William reve against malster and barrow Hilary term car Poll a copyhold  and a freehold borough English be alike both shall descend by custom to the  young son and if a copyhold be surrender to use for life and the young son die  before that estate determine it shall not by the custom descend to his next  young brother for the custom only extend to young son say quaere if he shall  not have it as heir to the father or whether the old son shall have it as heir  to the young brother?SC roll ab Jones Com dig   more Leon   Copy dyer roll ab  Bac ab   light b I peer wms term Rep trespass for enter into certain land call  HooGreen upon not guilty plead a special verdict be find whereby it appear  that George reve copyholder in fee of the land in question be parcel of the  manor of ho where the custom be that the land be of the nature of borough  English descendible to the young son have issue three son William the  plaintiff George and Charles and surrender that copyhold to the use of himself  and whether his wife and his heir and they be admit accord afterward George  the father die seize of this reversion which descend James to the say Charles  his young son croak car whether enter and enjoy it and afterward in James  Charles die without issue afterward whether in car die William reve the old  son be admit and enter George reve the second son enter and claim that land  and surrender to the use of the defendant malster who be admit upon who  William the plaintiff enter and he and the other defendant as his servant  reenter whereupon this action be bring et si super totan c this matter be  argue at the bar and after at the bench and it be argue at the bench by Jones  justice and by myself for the plaintiff and Berkley justice and Brampston  chief justice for the defendant the sole question be whether William reve son  and heir of George reve who create this reversion and brother and heir of  Charles who have this reversion as young son and heir in borough English or  George the middle son shall have this reversion first it be agree by they all  that George can have it as brother and heir of Charles by the custom because  the custom be only to extend to the young son and not among brother where no  such custom be find and without a special custom find that it shall descend to  the young brother a the law will not admit it because custom ought always to  be take strict b and so it be resolve in ballard case for a copyhold in  Tottenham c second it be agree by they all that although Charles never be  admit but die before admittance it be not material for it be all one as if he  have be admit for he be a copyholder and may have surrender or charge or let c  three they all agree that betwixt a copyhold in borough English and a freehold  in borough English there be not any difference d and that if whether the  mother have die in the life of Charles and Charles survive have enter and die  without issue then William shall have have the land as heir of Charles but the  great question be this be a reversion expectant upon a estate for life and  Charles never be seize of the land in possession but die in the life of the  tenant for life without issue whether George as young son may claim it or that  William as heir at the commonlaw shall have it a   light b roll ab Leon cro  James c Tothill Com dig d peer wms croak car er p Brampston chief justice and  Berkley argue strong that George the middle brother shall have it and by  consequence the defendant who claim under he as if Charles have never be bear  or in be for there be a reversion expectant upon a estate for life and the  tenant have the possession George shall make his title from his father and  take by descent from he who have the seize of the freehold and not make any  mention of he who have but the reversion expectant upon a estate for life e  and compare it to the case of a brother of the halfblood although the old son  survive the father yet he may claim it by descent from his father when the old  have not possession and croak car die without issue as Edward pl and Henry pl  and if the father die in possession and the old son survive die before entry  the second son although he be of the halfblood shall have it he claim by  descent from his father and never shall make mention of his brother although  in some respect he be a tenant to alien and change but in all action and writ  where be convey by descent there shall not be any mention of any but of those  who take the estate and have seize and not from other who never have seize the  law esteem they as if there never have be any such person as in Fitzherbert  recovery and   b Buckmers case and by consequence be may claim here as young  son by the custom as heir in borough English as if Charles never have be  because be have it by descent and in course of a descent but against that  Jones and myself hold that William the old brother have the better title and  we agree to all the case put of descent or convey by descent at the commonlaw  but in this case the young son have it by custom for be be young son at the  time of the death of his father that make he heir in borough English by the  custom and for this cause none can be say to be heir in borough English to his  father so long as his father life see   a gorge case and when the young son be  heir in who it vest by the custom it be a inheritance fix in he and the custom  have its operation in he and none may claim that after but be who be heir unto  he and therefore we hold that the young son who be in be at the time of the  death of his father only shall have it by the custom and if a man have issue  two son and be seize of land in borough English die seize of that land his  wife privement enseint of a son the son in be shall have it by the custom and  the son bear after shall not divest he because he be not young son at the time  of the death of his father vide Edward pl Henry pl ass if land vest in a heir  by reason of a contingency although another heir more near come after in be it  shall never be divest and he who will after claim ought to claim from he in  who the estate vest a so here this reversion vest in the young son by the  custom be quasi by a contingency and he be name heir per accidental happening  as in Ratcliff case   a and he be quasi a purchaser of that reversion  wherefore when he die without issue it shall descend to he who be his heir  which be the old son and he be his heir to his young brother and also heir to  his father who be last seize of the reversion and there be no reason but he  shall have it as heir to his brother and to his father and this case be not  like to the case put where they claim mere by the commonlaw and whereas it be  hold by Brampston and Berkley that George the young son shall have it as heir  in borough English because he be the young son when the feme die and the  reversion fall in possession but that be utter deny by Jones and myself for he  be not young son when his father die and none may have it by croak car that  custom but he who be young son at the time of the death of the father for as  it be say that such a one be birthright he thread and heir at the commonlaw so  in borough English that such a one be too little born at the time of the death  of his father and heir unto he accord to that custom and he who be the middle  son at the time of the death of his father can be say to be the young son at  that time and therefore not within the custom wherefore c a e this opinion  approve by holt chief justice in the case of clement v Scudamour Mod case salk  ld raym peer wms   light l c b Parker manuscript a see the will c a see  clement v Scudamour peer will croak car er p