Belfield plaintiff against Adam defendant in a ejection strong trial at the  bar Ro Rep Ro Abr what shall be say to be a forfeiture of a copyhold estate  what not in a ejection strong a trial at the bar by a hertfordshire jury be  have upon a lease make by one Southcot of a copyhold tenement parcel of the  manor of Bushy in evidence to the jury for the plaintiff the same rest upon  two thing upon a forfeiture of the copyhold estate upon the surrender of this  estate by the acceptance of another estate the matter of forfeiture be this S  because that for the space of three year the copyholder have not do his suit  at the lord court whether his not come to the court to de and perform his suit  whether this shall be any cause to forfeit his copyhold estate it be urge that  this shall be no forfeiture unless that he deny to de his suit and that no  such custom there be to have a forfeiture for nonfesans of his suit within  three year Haughton justice you ought to prove that he have knowledge give to  he of the time when the court be to be keep and also to prove that this be in  he a wilful refuse by he to de his suit and so a forfeiture dodderidge justice  a copyholder may withdraw his suit and this be only finable but by e fol if a  copyholder de deny his suit this be a forfeiture and therefore you be to prove  that he have warning of the court and refuse to come to de his suit croak  justice if it have be here say against the will of the god or object to de his  suit this have be a forfeiture but here it be only lie that he do withdraw his  suit presumption be then allege to prove this to be a forfeiture because at  the next court day he come into the court and do there take a new lease S to  himself for his life after to his wife for her life and after to his son the  whole court agree herein that this be no forfeiture if you can prove a warning  by the lord give to his copyholder of the time of his court to be hold for the  lord may hold his court when he will dodderidge the copyholder may be dwell  far off and without hear of the court and his be refuse to come thither to de  his suit unless this be so and Bulstrode the same direct prove there can be no  forfeiture here the withdraw of his suit be only fineable and no cause of  forfeiture another forfeiture be here allege for the cut down of tree to which  be answer that this be no forfeiture be warrantable by the custom this be  copyhold of inheritance but otherwise it shall be of a copyholder for life as  to the other point of forfeiture S the surrender for that the case be this  Robert smith a copyholder in feesimple Elizabeth come into the lord court and  there take a new estate from the lord of this copyhold S to himself for his  life after to his wife for her life and after to his son for his life whether  this act of his and new take in this manner be a give up of his estate of  inheritance or not it be urge that it shall not so be but peradventure if he  have only take a estate to himself for his life it may have be so but not here  as this case be be a take to himself to his wife and to his son to he and to  his wife for their life and after to his son this shall be no give up of his  inheritance but the same shall only enure by way of surrender a case remember  in the c b Elizabeth enter Hillar Elizabeth rot between Adam and shepherd  where Robert smith the son claim the copyhold of inheritance to this the other  plead the say acceptance to he to his wife and Bulstrode er p to their son and  upon this point a demurrer be there join and there adjudge this late  acceptance to be a give up of his inheritance Haughton justice the grant here  be of the reversion unto Southcot to have and to hold and do not say the land  but the reversion whereas in the commentary in Adam case it be there to have  and to hold the land dodderidge the reversion be land see revertor  as to the  take here by he for his life the remainder to his wife for her life the  remainder to his son for his life this amount but unto a surrender to the use  of himself for his life the remainder to the use of his wife for her life the  remainder to the use of his son for his life and this amount but unto a  surrender to this effect admit there be no forfeiture in the case Haughton if  lessee for year take a new lease but for five year this be a surrender of his  first lease and so it shall be if a copyholder de take a lease by indenture of  the lord of his copyhold estate this be a surrender of his copyhold dodderidge  if a copyholder of inheritance take a lease by indenture for year by this his  copyhold be go and this be a surrender of the inheritance but if he take a  lease to himself for life there peradventure it shall be another case but  without all question where he take it to himself to his wife and to his son  for their life the inheritance be not here surrender and go but this still  remain in he and this shall be in judgement of law but as a surrender to his  use for his life after to his wife for her life and after to the use of his  son for life and it be a clear case that this shall be so and so by this way  and by this construction all may well stand together Haughton seem something  to doubt of this whether this shall be so or not notam that the jury upon this  direction of the court be ready at the bar to give ageneral verdict at large  whereas the plaintiff think they will have find the matter special and for  this cause the plaintiff have some notice which way the jury intend to go in  their verdict be call he become nonsuit