Carthew winter versus LOVEDAZ Mod SC salk SC comb SC copyhold land be parcel  of demesne of a manor vide raym Poph Yelv more Lutw       cro lev lev Mod  sacred scripture in a special verdict in ejectment the case appear to be as  follow George powlett be seize in fee of the manor of Gotehurst in  somersetshire do upon the marriage of his son settle the same to the use of  himself for life and afterward to the use of his wife for life then to the use  of his son in tail and for want of such issue to his own right heir in which  deed of settlement there be this proviso sacred scripture that it shall be  lawful for the say George powlett during his life and for his wife after his  death during her life by deed indent to make lease either in possession for  the term of one two or three life or for the term of thirty year or for any  other term or term number or number of year determinable upon one h assize pl  Fitzherbert Abr title issue pl double plea h h b old Entr raze Ent I will cap  a verbal appointment of a clerk of the peace by the custos be sufficient vide  raym Mod queen Noy   light b comb h will Carthew er p two or three life or in  reversion for one or two life or for thirty year or for any other term or  number of year determinable upon one or two life so as such demise be not make  of any the ancient demesne land parcel of the say manor or of any other land  which for the space of seven year have be use as demesne land and so as the  ancient rend be reserve it be find that the land now in question be copyhold  land parcel of the say manor and be in the tenure of Richard Blancliflower for  the term of two life by copy of courtroll under a certain quitrent be the say  George powlett after the say settlement make a lease thereof to Robert  Blancliflower by deed indent for thirty year absolute to commence after the  two life then in be reserve the same rend as in the copy to Richard  Blancbflower the two life be now dead the lessor of the plaintiff claim as  heir in tail to his grandfather George powlett by virtue of the say settlement  and the defendant claim the term of thirty year under Robert blanchflower  Carthew there be two point make in this case whether these land be copyhold be  within the intent of this proviso which give the power of lease especial since  all the demesne land of the manor be except out of the power and all copyhold  land be demesne for this a inseparable quality of every copyhold that it be  time out of mind parcel of the manor if copyhold land shall be within this  power then whether such power be well pursue by this lease for year absolute  or whether this lease do not exceed the power because it shall have be for  year or for any other number of year determinable upon the death of one life  be a lease in reversion after two life in possession and after several  argument at the bar the court give their opinion seriatim videlicet holt chief  justice Turton and Eyre for the defendant videlicet that copyhold land be not  within the power of lease because they be within the exception of all demesne  land but as to the second point they hold that a lease for year absolute in  reversion after two life may be make by George powlett or his wife of any land  which be in their power of lease but justice Rokeby be of another opinion in  both point for he hold first that copyhold land be not within the intent of  this proviso and that if the demesne iands have not be except by express word  yet the power of lease will not have extend to they for if it do it will  destroy the tenure because copyhold land once lease be for ever enfranchise  and therefore it shall never be presume that the tenure be intend to be  destroy without express word of the party for that purpose as to the second  point all lease to be make by virtue of this power for year or any other  number of year ought to be determinable upon the death of one two or three  life as the case shall happen with respect to the present possession and to  the reversion and because this be a lease in reversion after two life in  possession and for year absolute therefore this not good for it ought to be  for year if one life live Carthew so long there be two life then in be for  otherwise there will be no proportion between a lease for one life in  reversion after two life in be and a lease for thirty year absolute in  reversion after two life for thirty year be always account a equivalent to  three life in possession therefore for this reason also the lease make by  George powlett be void et per holt chief justice arguendo a lease make to  commence at any day to come be proper a lease in reversion but in this case it  signify a lease to commence after some interest in be at that very time when  the lease in reversion be make that this power to lease for life in reversion  must be take to be a lease of the reversion it self and not a concurrent lease  and it can be otherwise because a freehold can commence in going to be notam  it be find that there be other land which the lord of this manor use to hold  in demesne Carthew er p and where there be a power give to make lease in  possession and reversion in such case if a lease be make in possession and  afterward some life drop he can make a new lease in reversion of the same land  because his power be execute by make the first lease that where a  qualification be annex to a power of lease which if observe go in destruction  of the power the law will dispense with such qualification as for instance  where there be a power to make a lease of a manor or of any part thereof so as  the ancient rend be reserve yet be may by this power make a lease of the  service parcel of the manor upon which no rend can be reserve otherwise the  express power will be defeat the plaintiff have judgement