case Ross against aldwick easter term Elizabeth roll a lease to a for life and  the life of two other be good for the three life and both estate be we take in  a and he may alien they though he can have no benefit of the remainder in his  own person ante S c gold SC more SC   a   light dyer Leon bull cro James roll  ab trespass for break his close at Edmonton the defendant plead not guilty and  a special verdict find that William Normington be seize of that land in fee  and let it to one Nicholas Aldwick and his assign during his life and the life  of William and Thomas Aldwick his son and afterward let it to Peter Ross for  year to who Nicholas Aldwick attorned afterward Niebolds Aldwick the father  let it to William his son the now defendant at will and die leave William and  Thomas his son and the say William be in possession at the time of the death  of nicholas father Peter Ross enter and the defendant oust he el si super  totom means the sole question be whether a lease to one for his own life and  the life of two other he a long and large estate than for his own life only  Johnson for the plaintiff hold that it be not for inasmuch as it be limit to  he for his own life it be the great estate of freehold and the limitation for  the life of other be vain and void for a man can have a great and lesser  estate in he at one and the same time but against that it be argue for the  defendant that it be a good limitation to he for the three life and he have  they all in he to assign and although he can have benefit in his own person of  more than his own life yet he liath the residue of the other life to assign  over and a man may have a great or a lesser estate in he all at one time where  the lesser be subsequent as a estate for life remainder for year which  although in his own person he can have benefit thereof yet he may assign it or  devise it as Edward or to forfeit it as Edward S title covenant and he may  save it in a quid law clamal as Edward quid law proclaim be and if it have be  limit to he for his own life remainder pur auter vie it have be good by a  grant over so if a reversion be grant to he pur auter vie it have be good and  so it be where it be all by one limitation he may thereof have benefit by  assign it over or to charge it with a rend or to let it for year which be good  as long as any of the cesti and vie he live and for express authority herein  be cite Edward pl Elizabeth Diersley v nevel and Elizabeth Feudals case  wherein it be hold but not adjudge that it be a good lease for the three life  and not for the life of the lessee only the common experience also in lease of  bishop and of tenant in tail be to he grant to one for his own life and the  life of two of his son and it have be allow always to be good as long as any  of they he alive and they be make in this manner because a lease for life  remainder over can be good and he will not take it in jointure with any other  for then the other may prejudice he in part and he can not surrender nor  change it at his pleasure croak Elizabeth and of this opinion be gawdy and  Fenner justice for otherwise he shall not take so much as be limit to he and  there be not any convenience herein but all the estate may well stand together  in he and Fenner say that he be of counsel with Mr Southcote in the common  plea where the bishop of London make such a lease to one for his own life and  of two other and it be agree to be good for all wherefore they send away other  justice give judgement for the defendant note Popham be there at the time of  the argument but rise before the end thereof but seem toagree in opinion with  they although he deliverredit not open wherefore it be adjudge ut above but no  judgement be enter because the party compound croak Elizabeth er p