issue, take any estate in the lands described by A. as "all my other lands situate in the parishes of H. and M. Peppercorn v. Peacock. Page 356 2. A testator being seised in fee of freehold lands, and also of copyholds, within the manor and forest of K. (which copyholds could not be entailed) after giving a freehold estate at H. "to the child or children which his wife should bear to him, their heirs and assigns," devised as follows: “I give, devise, and bequeath to my son Dr. J. S., his heirs and assigns for ever, all, &c., and (amongst other property the above copyholds); but if it shall happen my said son Dr. J S. shall die without child or children, in that case I give, devise, and bequeath all the before mentioned estates, &c. unto my five children, viz., Mary, &c. (who were illegitimate), their heirs and assigns for ever, to be equally divided amongst them, share and share and share alike; and if any of my said five children should die before they come of age without issue, such share of him, her, or them so dying shall go equally amongst the survivors. My will also is, and I hereby order and direct that if my present wife E. should leave no issue to inherit the freehold estate at H., that all the said estate at H. shall be subject to the same mode of distribution amongst my aforesaid five children as all the other property above mentioned given and bequeathed

to my said son Dr. J. S. in case he die without issue."

Held, that if the lands had been freehold, Dr. J. S. would, under the foregoing devise, have taken an estate-tail, with remainder over to the testator's five natural children, as the words "child or children" were used in the sense of "issue" generally; but that the lands being copyhold, and not being capable of being entailed, Dr. J. S. took a fee-simple conditional, on which no remainder could be limited. (a)

Held, also, that the lands being copyhold, which were not capable of being entailed, afforded no ground for construing the devise to the five natural children, to be an executory devise to take effect in the event of Dr. J. S. dying without any child living at his decease. Doe d. Blesard v. SimpPage 929 3. By a will (made before 1838), the

4.

son.

A copyhold is devised by A. to B. for life, remainder to C. in fee.

(a) But in Cro. Car. 43. it is said by Yelverton J., that a remainder limited upon an estate to the surrenderee and the heirs of his body, in a manor where no copyholder may surrender or devise his copyhold lands in tail, hath been allowed. In the principal nature of the estate which is taken under a case the special verdict is silent as to the surrender to A. and the heirs of his body.

B. is admitted and dies: C. has, before entry, a descendible estate, and upon the death of C. his customary heir, and not the customary heir of A. is entitled to the copyhold. Doe dem. Parker v. Thomas. Page 815 5. Upon the construction of the will of A., containing very special provisions (which are set out in the body of the report, antè 328., and also in the marginal note, ante 327.), this court certified to the Master of the Rolls

That the children of A. living at his death took a fee in six-sevenths of certain freehold property, and the whole interest in six-sevenths of certain leaseholds as tenants in common in certain proportions, as regarded males and females, in favour of males, with an executory devise in the event of any child leaving issue as joint-tenants in fee in the like proportions, and that the children of B., a deceased son of A., took an estate in fee in one seventh of the freehold, and the whole interest in one seventh of the leaseholds, as joint-tenants, in equal shares. That the estates and interests of the children of A. living at his death (with the exception of such as took effect by way of executory devise) and the estates and interests of the children of B. vested in them on the death of A.:

That the executory interests of the issue of such of the children of A. as were living at A.'s death vested in such issue respectively

upon the death of his parent; and that the executory interests to arise to the surviving children of A. on the death of any of A.'s children without leaving issue, vested in them respectively on the death of such children without leaving issue:

That the children of A. living at his death took six-sevenths of the residuary personal property, rents, profits, and accumulations, undisposed of, absolutely, as tenants in common, in the proportions before mentioned; and that the children of B., the decased son of A., took one seventh of the same residuary personal property, absolutely, as joint-tenants, in equal proportions:

That the widow of B. took no interest in the residuary property, either as widow or as administratrix of a deceased daughter. Radley v. Lees. Page 327

C., another son of A., by his will charged his lands with an annuity of 100l. to his widow in lieu of dowry. Held, that this annuity was not chargeable upon the share of C. in the freehold and leasehold lands so devised by the will of A., but that the same was chargeable upon C.'s share in the residuary personal property, rents, profits, and accumulations. Ibid.

DIMISIT.

Covenant in law arising upon this word.

Page 801. n. (6)

DOCKETING JUDGMENT.

DISCLAIMER.

of record.

Page 733. n. (d)

DISTRESS.

1. A declaration on a replevin-bond against the distrainee, alleged that the distrainee did not appear at the county court holden next after the making of the bond, and then and there prosecute her suit with effect against the distrainors. Rider, Assignee of the Sheriff of Gloucester, v. Edwards.

202

EJECTMENT.

See INCLOSURE Act.
Page 224 n.

1. Where a declaration in ejectment is personally served upon an attorney who is the tenant in possession, it is not necessary to explain the object of the service. Doe d. Duke of Portland v. Roe.

397

lessee in a great part of the demised premises came to and vested in the defendant by assignment; whereupon and whereby the defendant became possessed. The defendant pleaded that the said part of the premises did not come to or vest in her by assignment.

Held, that the allegation was sustained by shewing that an assignee of the term, demised part of the premises (the rent sued for being specifically reserved in respect of such part) to B. for a period exceeding the then remainder of the term, reserving a new rent payable to himself, exexceeding in amount that reserved by the original lease, and that the defendant was the executrix of the executor of B.; although the defendant had not entered or done any act beyond taking probate of B.'s will. Woollaston and others v. Hakewill. Page 297

Semble, that the new rent, so far as it exceeded the amount of the rent reserved by the original lease, would be a rent-seck.

Ibid.

FALSE IMPRISONMENT.

1. Trespass for assaulting the plaintiff, and causing him to be taken to a police station, and afterwards before a magistrate, upon an unfounded charge of having unlawfully attempted to procure from the banking-house of the defendant a blank cheque-book. The

defendant pleaded that he and certain other persons carrying on the business of bankers, and that one T. kept an account with them that the plaintiff did unlawfully endeavour to obtain from the said bankers a blank cheque-book, by falsely pretending that the said T. was his master, and had sent him for it that, in pursuance of such unlawful endeavour, the plaintiff induced one A. to go into the banking-house, and to ask for a blank cheque-book, and did falsely pretend to the said A. that the said T. was his master, and did direct the said A. to tell the bankers that the cheque-book was wanted for the said T.: that A. accordingly did so, and stated that he had been so sent by the plaintiff, and that the plaintiff was waiting outside for it; whereupon the defendant accompanied A. to the place where the plaintiff was waiting; and A. stated, in the presence and hearing of the plaintiff, that he had been so sent by the plaintiff: wherefore the defendant having good and probable cause of suspicion, and vehemently suspecting that the plaintiff had, by such false and fraudulent pretences as aforesaid, unlawfully endeavoured to obtain from the said bankers a blank cheque-book for unlawful and unauthorised purposes, committed the trespasses complained of.

Held, that the plea was bad, inasmuch as it neither alleged that a felony had been committed, so