brock plaintiff against bear defendant hill James b r rot stat Elizabeth cap  make against cottage in a action of trespass upon not guilty plead the jury  find a special verdict and upon the special verdict the case be this a  copiholder of inheritance do surrender this to the use of one for life and  afterward to the use of another and his heir the tenant for life of the  copyhold do build a mansionhouse and die after his death the copyhold tenant  of inheritance pretend that four acre of land of freehold be not lie to this  house accord to the statute of Elizabeth cap make against cottage erect pull  this house down the jury find that by the custom no copyhold tenant of  inheritance may pull down any dwell house but if he do the same shall be a  forfeiture and that this pull down of the house be contrary to the custom  brock the plaintiff be the lord of the manor and pretend this to be a  forfeiture bring his action against the defendant the copiholder allege that  the defendant to strew before voluntary to tear asunder messuagiuyn proadictum  the court clear of opinion that the copiholder can not pull down this house  his colour for so do be only because that four acre of freehold land be not  lie to the same the custom find to be that the lord in such a case may well  enter for a forfeiture to hold to drive out the defendant here because he have  the fee and inheritance as a customary tenant pretend that he may well pull  down the house Fenner justice if a tenant build a house and this be not cover  be may well pull this down again for that before the cover of it it be not a  house but when the house be cover he can then pull it down but it shall he  waste the jury have find this pull down of the house to be a forfeiture by the  custom the usage and custom make a copyhold Yelverton justice the place where  this house be build be ancient copyhold land if lessee for life build a house  upon this land and afterward pull it down again this be waste and this be a  forfeiture in the principal case William justice lessee for life be with a  condition that he shall not do waste he build a house and pull the same down  again this be do but of late time and therefore he can enter for this  condition yet this pull down be waste and he shall be punish for his waste  Fenner justice all contrary in this for he may well enter for his condition  William justice clear be can enter for this condition for that this condition  be annex unto the land and not unto the house which be build but of late time  and since the condition but whether this pull down of the house by the  copiholder of inheritance be a forfeiture of his copyhold estate this be  somewhat doubtful in regard that this house be so build and erect but of late  time Fenner Yelverton justice clear of opinion that this pull down of the  house be a forfeiture for that the place where the house be build be ancient  copih ld land fen justice lessee for life be upon condition that he shall do  no waste the lessee commit waste the lessor enter for the condition break he  shall not have a action Bulstrode er p of waste for waste do before his entry  afterward termin Hillar James b r this case be move again and John more argue  for brock the plaintiff Bulstrode two matter arise upon this special verdict  first whether a copiholder may by law justifle this erection of a cottage and  second if he shall be dispense with for this by statute law whether then by  the commonlaw this pull down shall be a forfeiture if not then whether it  shall be a forfeiture by the custom as the same be find by the jury first it  be to be examine here what estate a copiholder or a customary tenant have be  have only a bare estate as a tenant at will and this be not to be deny a  tenant at will ought not to deal or meddle with the land he be not uund to do  and perform such thing upon the land as tenant for year be to do and this  appear by Littleton that he shall not be punish in waste for permissive waste  e foe and by the commonlaw tenant at will can cut down any underwood and  voluntary waste by he shall be a forfeiture and so if be alien or make a feoff  or a lease for year as appear in Hurrel and smith case coke pa foe and  taverner and cromwells case croak pa if a copiholder cut down tree this shall  be a forfeiture and by h Fitzherbert title be plan that a tenant by copy of  court roll ought not to do waste nor to cut tree to sell but only for to  repair his house be have here a inheritance by the custom but when he do that  which be contrary to the custom he shall then be in no better a condition than  a bare tenant at will if lessee for year build a house and afterward pull it  down again this will he waste so here in this case the pull down of the house  by bear the copiholder be a forfeitur by the statute of Elizabeth cap no  cottage erect be to be suffer unless that four acre of freehold land be lie  unto it this statute be make to restrain lord of great waste from building of  cottage without lie of four acre of freehold land to the same this statute to  be extend to none but to those which have a freehold of inheritance and not to  be extend unto such a copiholder but admit this to be within the statute have  the copiholder then power and authority by this statute as this case be to  pull the house down again he have not Yelverto justice this case needs no help  of any custom for by the commonlaw this be a clear forfeiture if the custom be  that a copiholder may pull down house such a custom be not good if the custom  be for a copiholder to cut down tree in this for the warrant of such a custom  the difference will be this if be be a copiholder of inheritance then such a  custom for to cut down tree by such a copiholder will be a good custom but  otherwise it be if be be but a copiholder for life there such a custom to cut  down tree be not good as to the statute of Elizabeth cap against the erect of  cottage this statute extend to every freeholder to any one which build a new  house or convert old house unto cottage this statute mean to meet with they  all and such a copiholder as in this principal case be within the danger of  this statute croak justice agree in this and that a copiholder can prescribe  to do any thing that may any way trench to the diSinberitance of the lord a  copiholder of inheritance by custom may cut down tree but not another  copiholder Fenner justice a copiholder be not within the statute of Elizabeth  cap and if the lord lie freehold land to his message this be no parcel of it  and so not within the statute and there be no such power in a copiholder to do  as the statute do require to be down and I be present with the Lord Popham  when at a assize he do adjudge accord to this upon a evidence before he that a  copiholder be not within the statute of Elizabeth cap for erect of cottage and  this I conceive to be very clear that a copiholder be not within that statute  but as to the other point I hold it in some clearness also that when the  copiholder in this principal case have erect such a house or cottage be ednnot  pull the same down again but it will be a forfeiture Flemm chief justice the  matter here be that the woman who do erect this house or cottage be a copyhold  tenant for life and do not lie four acre of freehold land to it as to the  chief point in question be whether a copiholder may pull down house edify and  erect for habitation it be find by the special verdict that by the custom of  the manor a copiholder shall not do any waste and it be very Bulstrode clear  that if a copiholder do pull down house when they be build this shall be  adjudge to he waste and it be as clear that this shall not be aid by allege  that the same be new build for this be not material for when the house be once  build the same be then annex unto the freehold the second matter here  considerable be touch the Bulstrode er p statute of Elizabeth cap whether a  copiholder be within this statute or not if a copiholder of acre of land to he  and his heir by the custom of the manor erect a house or if a copiholder be  who have but three acre of land of inheritance by the custom and have no house  erect a house I think and that in some clearness that a copiholder be not nor  yet ever be take to be within the meaning and intention of the same the  statute be general that no person shall erectand unless he lie four acre of  his freehold land to it this be to be understand if be be a freeholder and do  erect a house and not lie four acre of freehold land to it he shall then be in  danger of that law but a copiholder be not within that law if he build a house  for the habitation of other the statute restrain none which do build a house  for their own dwell but for to prevent and to meet with the great greediness  of landlord be this stat make the which statute intend such a one who have  good power to build and also to pull down as he please and when he please  which a copiholder have not nor yet a termor for year and therefore they be  not within the same statute if the custom of a copyhold manor be that if a  copiholder do commit waste that this shall be a forfeiture this custom shall  be take strict and shall not be extend to permissive waste in this principal  case the pull down of this house by the copiholder be a clear forfeiture of  his copyhold estate relverton justice the statute be general no person shall  erect but yet there be no question if a man do erect a house for his own  habitation this be may very well do and this be out of the statute for the  statute be this that he shall not build a house for the habitation of another  without lie of four acre of freehold land to it otherwise he shall be in  danger of the law but if a copiholder erect diverse cottage upon the land  within the manor or if a freeholder erect a cottage and dwell in the same  himself this be not within the danger of the statute Fleming chief justice if  a copyholder have twelve acre of laud erect a house and allot to it two acre  this be not within the statute a copyholder erect a cottage and lie freehold  land part of his own freehold land to it yet this be not within the statute  notwithstanding that it be not copyhold land but freehold land that be lie to  it this matter be afterward move again curian lie accord that this set up  intend cottage erect for the habitation of other that be to say for stranger  and so by this mean to draw many together for the prevention of which mischief  that may thereby ensue be this statute make William justice and curian accord  in this that a copiholder be not within this statute of Elizabeth cap for  erect of cottage and the court also agree in this that the pull down of the  house so erect by the copiholder by he be a clear forfeiture of his copyhold  estate and so per curian judgement be give for the plaintiff and the rule of  court enter accord quod to go into judgment pro to express grief