coke Report27b Hobart and Hammond Michaelmas term Elizabeth in the king bench  see Fraser v mason Q b d Johnstone v earl Spencer Ch d SC cro Elizabeth pl  more supply   Cop S SC cite send for   Cop S post   a dougl t r pale yellow  ten Watk Cop Sugd vend that Edward Bart Prec n Cru dig vin Abr copyhold n pl X  b pl z b pl a c pl p c pl court a pl trial f pl Com dig copyhold h Bac Abr  copyhold l l see the note and reference infra the nonpayment of a unreasonable  fine where the custom be uncertain be no forfeiture of a copyhold whether a  fine be reasonable or not shall be determine g Acc   Cop S Tr Yelv burr burr  burr Inst b and n ib two pale yellow ten Watk Cop Bl Com vin Abr copyhold c b  pl you b pl Com dig copyhold g f ante two a m and see post b and the note  there ED h Acc t r   Cop S Tr pale yellow ten Watk Cop vin Abr copyhold u b pl  ED c Cr Elizabeth post b Bridgm roll   a b   more see skin vin Abr copyhold f  b pl Com dig copyhold g and see the book cite in n I infra I Acc   Cop S Tr  Watk Cop so it be of a admittance on a descent id ibidem ante   b and the note  ib in like manner be who be admit on a grant be in by the custom and therefore  not subject to the lord charge swain case post   Watk pale yellow ten ante I p  a m and the book there cite and as the surrendee be on admission in by the  surrender such admission have relation to the surrender and operate as from  its date Benson v Scott salk Vaughan d Atkins v Atkins burr therefore if the  surrender die between the surrender and admission though his heir as the  surrender die seize of the premise will take by descent and his widow be  entitle to dower yet on the admission of the surrendee the estate of the  surrender and consequent the descent and title to dower will be defeat Benson  v Scott sup Vaughan Atkins v Atkins sup and on the other hand if the surrendee  die before admission his heir shall be admit and thereupon shall be in by  descent and the widow of the surrendee shall have her free bench pale yellow  ten Vaughan d Atkins v Atkins sup ante p a d u so the admission shall relate  to the surrender so as to defeat the mesne act of the surrender Benson v Scott  sup and of the lord Granth v Copley sand and to entitle the surrendee to  recover in a action of ejectment the mesne profit from the time when the  surrender be make see holdfast d Wollams v Clapham I t r do d Jeffereys v  Hicks will do d Bennington v hall east cite ante p a d a ED coke report b er p  by the justice either upon demurrer or upon evidence to a jury on confession  or proof of the yearly value a copyholder need not pay a uncertain fine  immediate but if the lord appoint a certain day for payment he shall have a  convenient time to pay it by as to fine certain where a copyholder have  several land hold by several service the fine must be several assess so if he  surrender all the several copyhold to one tenant per ancient the condition of  a slave No fine be due either upon a descent or surrender till admittance for  that be the cause of the fine and if the tenant afterward refuse payment it be  a forfeiture up on evidence to a Jur these point be resolve by Popham chief  justice gawdy Clench and Fenner justice of the king bench that if the fine of  copyholder of a manor a upon admittance be un a fine Payable to the lord by  the copyholder may be divide into three class saint fine due on the change of  the lord d on the change of the tenant d for licence to demise c saint when  fine be due by the change of the lord such change must be by the act of God as  by the death f the lord for a custom that fine be due on every change of the  lord by a free tenant be void Inst b I a custom to pay a general fine on the  death of the lord be good though the manor have be alienate by the lord in his  lifetime Lowther v raw bro p c and any lord who have a right to admit have a  right also to such fine on the death of his predecessor whether he be tenant  for life only or by the courtesy or the like Somerset duke of v France stram d  when fine be due on the change of the tenant it be immaterial whether that  change be effect by the act of God or by the tenant own act Inst b I Kitch a  burr a fine however be Payable only by custom and where there be no custom no  fine be due in some manor it be not customary to pay any fine on the  admittance of a person take by descent do d Tarrant v hellier t r Kitch b  dougl n Freem pl the fine also be Payable on admission hence no fine can be  due till the tenant be actual admit and the lord or steward can refuse  admission till the fine be pay infra a and the note there but by stat Geo c S  steward of manor may insist on payment of their fee and the stamp duty before  they accept surrender or grant admittances c as no fine be due till admittance  where no admission be necessary consequent no fine will be due as where a  reversioner reenter for condition break or on determination of a estate for  life c post   a Leon cro Elizabeth   Cop S Tr Kitch a Calth pale yellow ten Bl  Rep though it be otherwise of a grantee of such reversion Watk pale yellow ten  Watk Cop so no admission will be necessary nor fine due on a release of right  to a person who be admit tenant de facto Inst a I ante b nor on I recovery of  seize by a disseizee   Cop Tr nor where the same estate be continue as in the  case of free bench hob lev hut burr Watk pale yellow ten courtesy Watk Desc it  or seize in right of marriage   Cop S p dyer a Leon Calth Watk pale yellow ten  Watk Cop it be once hold that executor continue the estate of their testator  and so need no admission but it be now settle that they must be regular admit  and pay their fine earl of bath v Abney burr but this must necessary be  understand of such estate or term by reason of which the testator himself or  original termor will have be subject to admission for have a copyholder lease  for year by licence the lessee will not require any admittance as he will not  become tenant to the lord and consequent his executor will need none but if a  term of year be limit on a surrender r create by devise as in the case of the  earl of bath v Abney sup hanwells case dyer a c it will then be hold of the  lord by copy the term or will be a tenant to the lord and therefore must be  admit and pay his fine I Watk   with respect to a surrender take a new estate  it seem to be the better opinion notwithstanding what Lord Mansfield be report  to have say in roe d noden v Griffith burr that he be compellable to be admit  to that estate which he be to take under the surrender see Bl Rep S c and as a  new estate be coke report b er p certain b yet the lord can demand or exact  excessive and d unreasonable fine and b whether a fine be certain or not must  be decide by the roll of the manor Allen v Abraham Bulst tooth and if it can  be show by a series of ancient roll that the fine be in remote time uncertain  the entry of they as certain in subsequent roll though for the period of two  or three hundred year will not make they certain but the entry of a few  payment will not be permit to operate either way godb Watk Cop where copyhold  be only grant for life without a right of renewal the fine be uncertain and  the lord may insist on his own term wharton v king Anstr a custom to renew  copyhold for life can only be on payment of fine certain SC Abergavenny v  Thomas Anst Grafton v Horton bro p c Inst I ED d more Cr Elizabeth Cr car roll  roll roll Rep will   a   Brownl Trebys argument in quo warranto hob   light b  b a ante b vide above b brown case skiff   Ent c and see the book cite in n a  above limit it shall seem that a fine will be due though in such case it be  seldom take as to the estate of the surrender Watk Cop a fine also be not  Payable by a beneficiary and trust the person have the legal estate be the  tenant to the lord m who admission a fine be due more Ves burr vern nor upon a  mere covenant by the copyholder to surrender though such covenant be present  by the homage and if the covenantee assign his interest to a three person to  who the copyholder surrender one fine only will be due king v the Lord of the  manor of Hendon t r Zinzon v Tolmash show so a person have n equity of  redemption may dispose of it by deed or devise without a surrender and  consequent no fine will be due on forfeiture the surrendee become the legal  tenant and must hereupon be admit and pay his fine faucet v Lowther Ves  Tredway v Fotherley vern so a person have a authority only as a power of sale  need not be admit or pay any fine Beal v shepherd cro James godb can holder d  Salyard v Preston will as to fine on assignment of bankrupt estate ante two p  a n with respect to those case where one admission and one fine shall serve  for several person it have be already lie down that where the we S of a  surrender be limit to one for life or year with several remainder over only  one admission be requisite and consequent only one fine will be due ante b and  n d ib Blackburne v grave Mod more cro James vent lev lev Kitch a and in this  case the most equitable mode be to assess the fine on the admission of the  particular tenant and to apportion it to the interest of the several claimant  but if on the admission of the particular tenant the whole fine be actual pay  no portion can be due on the accession of the remainder man see burr though  the lord may assess the whole fine on the tenant for life or apportion it yet  he can remit it to the tenant for life and charge the whole on the remainder  man Kensington v Mansell Ves but a special custom that a remainder man come  into possession on the death of the tenant for life must be admit and pay a  fine be good barn v Corsee lev do d whitbread v Jenney east ante p b n d and a  fine be Payable by the surrendee of a remainder man Ancelme v Ancelme cro  James burr Watk pale yellow ten and by the heir of the remainder man burr or  reversioner dyer pl in the case of joint tenant but one fine be due on their  admission and if one die the other take his share and continue in on the  original admission Kitch a   Cop S roe d Ashton v Hutton will and as several  coparceners make but one tenant it shall seem that one fine only will be due  on their admittance see I Watk Cop but when one coparcener die the other or  the heir of the decease must be admit to the share of the one so die and pay  their fine   Cop S p Calth Watk pale yellow ten so tenant in common must be  several admit and pay several fine the that have several estate p wms ld raym  so in the case of devisees of a copyhold hold as tenant in common attree v  Scott east and the multiplication of heriots and fee on admission still  continue notwith coke report a er p if he do the copyholder by the law may  deny to pay they without any forfeiture c and it shall be determine by the  opinion of the justice before who the matter be depend either upon demurrer or  upon evidence to a jury upon the confession or proof of the yearly value of  the land whether the fine demand be reasonable or do d for if the lord may  assess excessive fine at their pleasure all the estate of copyholder which be  a great part of the realm and which have continue from time whereof c will be  at the will of the lord defeat and destroy which will be inconvenient and it  be say that accord to this resolution in this point it have be adjudge in c b  in e Hoddesdons case it be resolve if the lord in case of uncertainty of fine  assess a reasonable fine and require the copyholder to pay it coke Report28a  the copyholder be not bind a to c SC S p cite send for sup   Cop S lev pale  yellow ten Cru dig Watk Cop vin Abr copyhold z b pl p c pl Com dig copyhold h  Bac Abr copyhold I two year improve rend without deduct landtax c except quit  rend be now fix as the sum assessable for a arbitrary fine grant v astle dougl  Hatton Bart v hatsell stram it belong of right to the lord or his steward to  assess the fine but by custom the homage may do so roll Rep Freem the  assessment by the lord or steward may be make out of the manor Yaxley v rainer  ld raym but a assessment by some person or other be requisite dougl though it  be not necessary to prove a entry of such assessment on the court roll Lord  Northwick v Stanway east smith and in assumpsit for the recovery of a  arbitrary fine the plaintiff must prove that the sum state in his count to  have be assess amount to two year value of the estate because he can recover a  less sum than that lie in the declaration Whitfield v hunt dougl n grant v  astle Id n and a excessive assessment of a fine be not make good by a  remittitur of the excess Lord Northwick v Stanway b b and one gross fine can  be assess on the admission to several copyhold tenement grant v astle gap and  if it be so state in the declaration in a action for the fine it be error and  not cure by verdict SC ED d Acc   Cop S supply   Cop S post   a Willows case  post   l Dalton v Hammond more Cowper v clarke p wms grant v astle dougl Inst  b b I n ib I Watk Cop Cru dig vin Abr copyhold p c pl court a pl trial f pl  Com dig copyhold h Bac Abr copyhold I the lord be not oblige to prove it  reasonable but the copyholder must prove it to be otherwise Denny v leman hob  though a bill in equity can be bring by a copyholder to be relieve against a  excessive fine yet a bill will lie to settle a general fine to be pay by all  the tenant except on voluntary grant in order to prevent multiplicity of suit  Cowper v clark sup e Cr Elizabeth per v clark sup ED a Cr Elizabeth more    palm infra n e stand the reunion of the same land afterward in one person the  estate or interest in the land once divide in severalty continue several S c  and see infra a as to several tenement pay several fine in some manor no fine  be Payable by a heir at law on admission t r ante b but in most manor a fine  be due Watk Cop so where the heir or other person take as special occupant he  must be admit and pay his fine   Cop S Tr p pale yellow ten Bl Rep but there  can be no general occupant of a copyhold see ld raym pale yellow ten I Watk  Cop press stand at a distance d fine due on licence to alien demise c can only  be claim by special custom for by general custom fine be due only on admission  see   Cop S p but if such a custom exist debt will lie for recovery of the  fine Yaxley v rainer ld raym I Watk Cop fine for alienation due by the custom  of particular manor be preserve by the statute car c ante I p b n p Inst b two  what shall be deem a reasonable fine and as to the assessment and recovery  thereof see the next note ED coke report a er p pay it present e because he  can tell what fine the lord will assess et no one holding to foresee and  therefore be can provide any certain sum and therefore he shall have  convenient time to pay it if the lord himself appoint no certain day for  payment of it but otherwise it be of fine certain f it be resolve that where a  copyholder have several land several hold by several service by copy there the  lord ought to assess and demand the fine b several for every parcel which be  so several hold g for the tenant may refuse c to pay the fine for one parcel  and forfeit that and pay the fine for the other and as it be agree in taverner  case every several tenure have a several condition in law d facile annex to it  and therefore the lord ought for every several tenure to assess and demand a  several fine so if all the say several copyhold be surrender to the use of  another and his heir and the lord admit he e tenendum per ancient the  condition of a slave ind prius debt is owed et de jure consuet there as it be  also resolve in taverner case the tenor be several and therefore the fine  ought to be several assess and demand h Popham chief justice say it be adjudge  in sand case that no fine be due to the lord either upon surrender or descent  until admittance I for the admittance e Acc   Cop post   Watk Cop Cru dig vin  Abr copyhold a c pl Com dig copyhold h Bac Abr copyhold I ED light Rep   b f S  p Cru dig vin Abr copyhold a c pl Com dig copyhold h Bac Abr copyhold in SC  cro Elizabeth more it be say that when a fine be certain the heir ought to  tender it upon his prayer to be admit but as the fine be not due till  admittance it seem to be the better opinion that the fine though certain need  not be tender till admittance be actual make Watk Cop ED b Cr Elizabeth more  see n g infra g Acc   Cop S ante b Hitch v Wallis in person Blackstone I at  the lend assize for the county of Cambridge Geo cit in grant v astle dougl  Searle v marsh fish Cop Appx pale yellow ten Watk Cop Cru dig vin Abr Cop n pl  X b pl z b pl Com dig copyhold h Bac Abr copyhold I where a person be admit to  several distinct tenement the steward of the manor be not entitle as a matter  of general right to the full fee on each admission separate and therefore  where no custom prevail in the manor to that effect he must stand on his  quantum to deserve Everest v Glyn marsh taunt ED c Cr Elizabeth more pale  yellow ten Cru dig vin Abr copyhold n pl X b pl b pl Com dig copyhold h Bac  Abr copyhold infra n h d ante a n b e ante b Leon vin Abr copyhold z b pl h S  p Com dig copyhold Bac Abr copyhold I and see the book cite in note g above ED  I S p burr t r pale yellow ten Kitch a I Watk Cop Bart Prec n Cru dig vin Abr  copyhold a c pl p c pl Com dig copyhold h Bac Abr copyhold I ante p b n a and  therefore if the lord of a manor refuse to admit the surrendee on account of a  disagreement respect the slay the court will grant a mandamus to compel he to  do so the king v the Lord of the manor of Hendon t r on the other side as no  fine be due till admittance the admission of the tenant be compulsory   Cop S  Tr pl Bl Com and if the tenant do not come to be admit on the usual  proclamation the lord except in the case of femes covert and infant who estate  be protect by the stat Geo c which prescribe the mode to be take by the lord  see roe d Tarrant v hellier t r Kensington v Mansell Ves Inst I may seize the  land to his own use till the tenant appear and be admit and if there be a  special custom for that purpose may seize they as a absolute forfeiture coke  report a er p be the cause of the fine and if after the tenant deny to pay the  fine it be a forfeiture and so it be resolve by Wray and periam justice of  assize in evidence to a jury in the county of Suffolk inter Nicholas Bacon Knt  plaintiff and flatman defendant for a copyhold of the manor of walsham in the  Willows in the county of Suffolk