coke b JENNINGSS case cite in the case before Trin Elizabeth rot in the king  bench a be tenant for life under a will remainder to her son in tail a prcipe  be bring against a who vouch the son who vouch over the common vouchee by  which mean a recovery be have hold the recovery be good and be a bar to the  reversion of the heir of the devisor resolve at the commonlaw a recovery  against tenant for life with voucher upon a true warranty and recovery in  value will bind he in remainder No Act have be make to preserve any reversion  or remainder expectant on a estatetail and tenant in tail have power to bar he  in remainder or reversion the stat Westminster and which give resceit to he in  the remainder or reversion upon default of he that hold per gift must be mean  of the donee after possibility of issue extinct after the stat h if tenant for  life have make a lease for year and the lessee for year have make a feoff in  fee and the feoff have suffer a common recovery in which the tenant for life  be vouch and in which he vouch over the common vouchee it be out of the say  stat h the Act of Elizabeth do not extend to preserve any reversion or  remainder expectant on a estatetail where tenant for life be implead and  tenant in tail be vouch SC Anders more cro Elizabeth Vid the entry   Ent nu  between a wiseman and crow the case be such Thomas wiseman have issue two son  William by his first wife and Thomas his young and a daughter by Dorothy his  second wife and be seize of land in fee hold in socage by his will in write  devise they to the say Dorothy his wife for life the remainder to Thomas his  son in tail and die by which the wife be seize for life the remainder to  Thomas the son and the reversion of the fee descend to the say William the say  daughter marry Jennings and after the stat of Elizabeth c a common recovery be  have against the say Dorothy be tenant for life in which Thomas in remainder  in tail be vouch and in which Thomas vouch over the common vouchee without any  assent of the say William the heir in reversion which recovery be to the use  of the say Thomas and his heir and afterward Thomas die without issue Jennings  in the right of his wife be sister of the whole blood to Thomas enter upon who  William the plaintiff enter upon who crow the defendant by the commandment of  Jennings reenter upon which reentry this action of trespass be bring and if  the say common recovery have bar the reversion of the say William  notwithstanding the say Act of Elizabeth be the question and in this case four  point be resolve that at the commonlaw a recovery against tenant for life with  voucher upon a true warranty and recovery in value will bind he in the  remainder as the book be in e recovery in value e ibidem ass p a e b and the  reason be because the particular estate and the estate in remainder be but one  estate and one warranty may extend to coke a both and therefore the recompense  in value shall enure to both the estate and it a   b before b winch a raym Br  vouch Br recovery in value Br n c before b Leon Leon raze recovery coke report  b er p appear by the preamble of the Act of b h c that a recovery suffer by  the tenant in a real action against tenant for life by covin and hot upon a  true warranty will either bar he in the remainder or reversion or at least  toll they of their entry but now it have be resolve in c pelham case in the  first part of my report that a common recovery have against tenant for life  only be a forfeiture of his estate because a common recovery be now but a  common conveyance or assurance vide d ass pl e e Resceit f ass g e b it be  resolve that no Act have be make to preserve any reversion or remainder  expectant on a estate tail for a estatetail be a estate which by possibility  may endure for ever and tenant in tail have power to bar he in remainder or  reversion and therefore the stat of west h c which be make at the same  parliament that the statute de I gift conditional be make for the preservation  of he in the remainder or reversion give resceit to they and provide for they  in these word eoden modus si to hold in dote per law England well aliter ad  boundary will well per gift in quo to keep back reversion to make defaltam  admitta hredes well that ad quos observe return and although the statute say  per gift which by the letter extend to donee in tail yet the judge know as  well the possibility of the continuance of the estatetail as his power to dock  he in reversion or remainder extend the say general word by construction to  the estate of the donee in tail after possibility of issue extinct who in  truth have a estate but for life which be but part of the gift for a estate of  inheritance be give and now the donee have but a estate for life and therewith  agree e Resceit e b h and the book in e Resceit be in report and be to be  intend of tenancy in tail after possibility and not of a estatetail and  therefore in e b the case be remarkable land be render by fine to Robert and  Alice his wife in tail the remainder to Thomas in tail save the reversion to  the donor Robert die without issue Alice his wife be implead in a prcipe quod  To give back who make default after default for which one Simon the right heir  of the donor who have the reversion in fee surmise that as well Robert as  Thomas be dead without issue pray to be receive the demandant counterpleaded  the resceit because Thomas who be in the remainder in tail have issue John who  yet be alive and the demandant counsel make two objection against the resceit  coke b first that the estate of the donee be not immediate to the estate of  Alice send non allocatur for there it be say that it be adjudge that if land  be lease for life the remainder to another for life save the reversion to the  lessor that he in reversion have be receive notwithstanding the mesne  remainder and it be true that it be so adjudge in e Resceit where the case be  there be tenant for life the reversion remainder to e for life the reversion  of the fee to r tenant for life be implead in a live prcipe and e r pray to be  receive and then hill object against the resceit that the statute give that he  to who the reversion be immediate after the death of tenant for life shall be  receive and we have see that be to who the reversion be where there be a mesne  estate for life have bring a writ of a waste and be not receive to b Cr  Elizabeth   a   light a and Leon Leon rastal recovery c Leon   b Leon and more  Poph   light a a Vaugh brow   a roll Rep   b   b d   b Leon Leon   light a a  Br Entre congeable Br forfeiture de terre roll   b e   a   b   light a Leon  Leon f Leon Leon roll Inst c I Leon Inst c raze tail   b   b   light a f n b c  h more Jones Cr James e a roll Inst   b light Rep coke report a er p that writ  which case of waste be well agree and the difference take between that and the  case at bar be because in the action of waste it be to defeat the mesne estate  but here it be to save the mesne estate and e Resceit agree the second  objection in the say book of e be because there be a mesne estate in tail  which the book call a fee mediate betwixt the tenant for life and he in the  reversion in fee and where there be fee mediate be in reversion by force of  the say statute shall not be receive and so the case be there rule that he be  not receivable and the difference be take where the remainder be limit over  for life there be in reversion shall be receive and the reason be because he  who in remainder have no high a estate than the tenant himself have but in the  case here there be a fee mediate between he who pray now and the tenant who  may have be receive if he have come and afterward the defendant say that there  be no such John in a thing naturan but note reader if he in reversion in fee  and he in the mesne estate for life at the same time pray to be receive the  mesne estate for life in respect of the immediateness and proximity shall be  prefer before the reversion in fee for the word of the statute be general S  admitta hredes well b that ad quos observe return the law which always respect  order of proximity prefer the small and next estate be it in remainder or  reversion for life before the great and remote estate in fee and therewith  agree e a b in pierce de Grimsteads case and c the statute which give the writ  of error and attaint to he in reversion during the life of tenant for life c  give no such remedy to he in reversion expectant on a estatetail vide the  marquis of Winchester case in the three part of my report and the statute of a  h c provide only for the preservation of the reversion or the remainder  expectant on a estate for life c and not on a estatetail coke a and to this  effect that all recovery by agreement against tenant by the courtesy tenant  for life in dower tenant in tail after possibility of issue extinct of any  land c whereof the tenant shall be seize as tenant for life tenant by the  courtesy or tenant in tail after possibility of issue extinct shall be void  against those then in reversion c so that by this statute no provision be make  for the preservation of the reversion or remainder expectant on a estatetail  it be resolve that sundry evasion be invent out of the say stat of h and  therefore if after that statute tenant for life have make a lease for year and  the lessee for year have make a feoff in fee and the feoff have suffer a  common recovery in which the tenant for life be vouch and in which he vouch  over the common vouchee that this be out of the purview of the Act of h for  two reason because the tenant for life at the time of the recovery against the  feoff be not seize for life but have but a right he in remainder or reversion  have not then S at the time of the recovery the remainder or reversion but  only a right for all be divest by the feoff of the lessee for year a and so  iwas hold in c b Trin Elizabeth Elizabeth b roll c Reg a r c Vet n b a b f n b  a   a b a bull palm dyer I pl Cr Elizabeth dyer pl Inst a Cr Elizabeth   a    light a I Anders Leon Leon rastal recovery a a feoff be former much resort to  as a mean of make a tenant to the prcipe it be adopt from a supposition that  if the feoff have a mere naked possession without any right or title of entry  yet a feesimple pass by the feoff with livery of seize but this practice be  say to be discontinue since the case of tailor they atkins v Horde burr Cowp  brown parliament Cas in that case the tenant in tail in remainder be in  possession under a judgement in ejectment make a feoff in fee for the purpose  of suffer a common recovery and a common recovery be suffer the prcipe be  bring against the feoff and it be hold that there be no good tenant to the S  Lord Mansfield consider it as a seize only at the election of the lessor and  observe if the lessee for life or year make a feoff the lessor may still  distrain for the rend or charge the person to who it be pay as a receiver or  bring a ejectment and choose whether he will be consider as seize and in the  late case of do v line barn cres SC dow Ryl the court seem to have approve  coke report b er p that in the like case where b tenant for life in such  common recovery come in as vouchee that it be out of the statute h as Bendloes  sergeant have report and that be the reason as it also appear by the preamble  of the say Act of Elizabeth at the make of the same Act videlicet where  diverse person be seize or that have be seize c for life c have permit and  suffer themselves to be vouch by other person by agreement or covin between  they c to the great prejudice of those to who the reversion or remainder  thereof have appertain or ought to appertain t it be resolve that the Act of a  Elizabeth do not extend to preserve any reversion or remainder expectant on a  estatetail where tenant for life be implead and tenant in tail be vouch and  therefore all the part of the Act be consider the title of the Act be for  avoid of recovery suffer by collusion by tenant for life c and this title do  not extend to the case at bar for two reason a recovery can be say by  collusion where tenant in tail be in the recovery tenant in fact or tenant in  law as vouchee for the law as incident to his estate bag make the land and all  the remainder and reversion subject to his pleasure and he have right and  power to bar they all law fraud never cohabitant and therefore the title for  the Act be for avoid of recovery by collusion c can extend to a recovery where  tenant in tail be party or privy the second part of the Act be coke b the  preamble and that do not extend to the case at bar for four reason the word of  the preamble be whereas diverse person be seize or that have be seize of land  c as tenant by the courtesy tenant in tail after possibility of issue extinct  or otherwise only for term of life or estate determinable upon life or life so  that the intent of the maker of the Act be to avoid recovery against tenant  for life only and not when tenant in tail be party or privy by agreement and  covin between they and as it have be say covin can be when tenant in tail be  party or privy against the same particular tenant and in this case the  recovery against the particular tenant do not bar the reversion but the  vouchee of tenant in tail and his vouchee over have permit and suffer  themselves to be vouch c so that the vouchee of tenant for life and not the  tenant in tail be intend to be prohibit the three and principal part of the  Act be the body of the Act that such recovery against such particular tenant c  and in the case at bar the recovery against tenant for life do not bar the  reversion but the judgement give for tenant in tail to have in value that bind  the reversion as have be say before or against any other with voucher of any  such particular tenant which clear do not extend to the case at bar forasmuch  as tenant in tail be vouchee the proviso that all and every such recovery  which relate to recovery by covin c mention before in the title preamble and  body of the Act which do not extend where tenant in tail be vouch and that  such recovery shall bind those who assent of record be affirmative word and do  not diminish the vigour and force of a common recovery in which the tenant in  tail be vouch and in which he vouch who by the law have power over the land as  have be say before and it will be very mischievous if this Act shall not be so  take or rather if this Act shall be expound against the writ and the intent  also thereof for when a common assurance be that tenant in tail of land with  the remainder or reversion over bargain and sell the land by of this doctrine  in tailor v Horde Lord Mansfield also remark in Jenningss case the recovery be  support because the party have power but this observation although applicable  to the fact of the case be not so to the point as lie down in the second  reason for the three resolution Vid butler note I Co Litt 330b preston cony  vol I p smith v Parkhurst atk EA pomfret v Lord Windsor Ves a feoff by lessee  for year be a forfeiture of his term nor will a assignment of the term to a  trustee before the feoff prevent the forfeiture Lord dorm ejectment KB hill  Preston Conv vol two p xxxii b   a Benl in kelw a n Benl pl Leon Leon Jones    light a palm a before a b Cr Elizabeth   light a   b and more winch Leon coke  report a er p deed indent and enrol to another against who the writ of entry  in the post be bring and he vouch the tenant in tail and he vouch over God  forbid that the estate of subject which depend on such recovery shall be draw  in question and yet the bargainee in such case have but a estate determinable  on the life of tenant in tail also if tenant for life be implead in a prcipe  and make default after default and he in remainder in tail be receive who  vouch over the common vouchee it shall bind the estatetail and the remainder  or reversion also and therewith coke a agree Knyvetons case Elizabeth dyer a  vide b Owen and Morgan case and judgement in the case at bar per totan curian  nullo to speak against be give for the defendant against the plaintiff upon  which the plaintiff bring a writ of error and the judge of the common plea and  the baron of the exchequer c agree with the justice of the king bench that the  say recovery have bar the plaintiff reversion but for insufficient plead the  judgement be reverse b salk have overrule this case