with interest accruing under different titles; or accruing under the same title (other than descent), but at different periods; or conferred by words of limitation importing that the grantees are to take in distinct shares: (1 St. C. 348, 8th edit.; Will. R. P. 138, 13th edit.)

Q.-By what three means may there be tenants in common? A.-1. By express limitation. 2. By the destruction of a joint tenancy, as if one of two joint tenants alienates his interest to a stranger. 3. By the destruction of an estate in coparcenary, as if one of two coparceners alienates her share to a stranger: (1 St. C. 349, 8th edit.)

Q. How is an estate in coparcenary created, and what persons are usually coparceners ?

A. An estate in coparcenary always arises by descent. Females are usually coparceners: (1 St. C. 343, 8th edit.; Will. R. P. 104, 13th edit.)

Q.-Of what two sorts are coparceners? Why are they called coparceners?

A.-Coparcenary arises either by common law or particular custom. By common law, as where a person seised in fee simple or fee tail dies, and his next heirs are two or more females-in this case they shall all inherit. Coparceners by particular custom are where lands descend, as in gavelkind, to all the males in equal degrees, as sons, brothers, uncles, &c. : (1 St. C. 343, 8th edit.)

According to Littleton, parceners are so called because they always could be compelled to make partition: (sect. 241; Will. R. P. 104, 13th edit.) But so now can joint tenants and tenants in common: (see St. C. sup.; Will. sup.)

Q.-A freehold estate devolves upon two sisters in fee as tenants in common; what is the denomination of their tenancy? They have no brother, but have another sister, and one of the two sisters die intestate; who would be entitled to the deceased sister's estate?

A. As stated in the question, it is a tenancy in common. If the deceased sister left no issue or parent living, her share would descend upon the other two sisters as coparceners, subject to husband's curtesy, if any (St. C. ch. viii.)

Q.-Do estates held in joint tenancy, tenancy in common, cenary, differ in any and what essential particulars?

and copar

A. Yes, in the following: Among joint tenants there is a unity of title and of time in the commencement of their title. But as to tenants in common, neither of these requisites is necessary, and only the former amongst coparceners. The title of joint tenants and tenants in common arises by purchase, that of coparceners by descent. Among joint tenants there is an entirety and equality of interest; they being seised per my et per tout; and there exists the jus accrescendi, or benefit of survivorship, between them. Tenants in common and coparceners are each seised of a distinct though undivided share which need not be equal; and there is no benefit of survivorship between either: (1 St. C. ch. viii.)

Q.—If land should be given to A. and B., man and wife, and their heirs, what would their estate be called?

A.-Formerly an estate by entireties (infrà), but now, by 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75, they would take as joint tenants.

Q. What is the distinction between a joint tenancy and a tenancy by entireties?

A.-An estate by entireties is that given to husband and wife and their heirs. They are seised per tout et non per my; whereas joint tenants are seised per my et per tout, and may, without the assent of the other, convey an undivided moiety of the estate. But neither husband nor wife can dispose of any part of the inheritance without the consent of the other: (1 St. C. 338, 8th edit.; Will. R. P. 135, 228, 13th edit.)

Q. When two persons, not being partners, purchase an estate out of their own money in equal shares, and take a conveyance of the estate, simply to themselves in fee, what is the effect of this conveyance at law and in equity? and what difference would it have made if the purchase money had been contributed in unequal shares?

A. In the first case put they will hold the estate as joint tenants, both at law and in equity. But in the second, on the death of either of them, there will be no survivorship in equity, they will be deemed to be purchasers in the nature of partners, and to have intended to hold the estate in proportion to the sum which each advanced; but it was otherwise at law (St. Eq. § 1206.)

Q.—A., B., and C. are brothers, A. being the eldest; B. and C. become joint tenants of land in fee simple; B., without C.'s knowledge, conveys his undivided moiety in fee to D. by way of mortgage-B. then dies; does C. on B.'s death take the entirety, or does a moiety (subject to the mortgage) descend on A. as B.'s heir-at-law ?

A.-The mortgage, being an absolute conveyance, will sever the joint tenancy, and C. and D. will hold as tenants in common, and on B.'s death intestate his share will descend to A., his heir, subject, of course, to the mortgage.

Q.-Distinguish an estate held in joint tenancy and coparcenary as to the inheritance.

A.-Where an estate is held by two joint tenants in fee, the inheritance will, on the death of one, descend to the survivor; because joint tenants

are seised per my et per tout. But coparceners have distinct though un

divided shares, and on the death of one intestate, her share will descend upon her heir-at-law: (Will. R. P. ch. vi. pt. 1.)

Q.-A testator devises land to A. and B. and their heirs. A. dies intestate leaving a son, and afterwards B. dies intestate leaving two daughters, one of whom dies intestate, leaving a son. Who can convey

the land to a purchaser ?

A. The surviving daughter of B. and the son of the deceased daughter are the proper parties to convey the land. The limitation to A. and B. was one in joint tenancy; and the two daughters of B. were coparceners, amongst whom there is no right of survivorship: (Will. R. P. 104, 477, 13th edit.) (a)

Land is conveyed to A., B. dies next, also leaving

(a) This question can also be answered from the above: B., and C., their heirs and assigns. A. dies leaving a son. a son; and C. dies last, leaving three daughters. How does the land descend on the respective deaths of A., B., and C. intestate?

Q. What is the proper form of conveyance from one joint tenant to another, and why?

A. The legal possession or seisin of the whole of the lands belongs to each one of the joint tenants of an estate of freehold; no delivery can therefore be made to him of that which he already has. The proper form of assurance between joint tenants is accordingly a release by deed, and this release operates rather as an extinguishment of right than as a conveyance; for the whole estate is already supposed to be vested in each joint tenant, as well as his own portion. And in the Norman-French, with which our law abounds, two persons holding land in joint tenancy are said to be seised per mie et per tout: (Wms. R. P. 137, 13th edit.)

Q. If there be three joint tenants in fee simple, and one of them releases his share to another of the three, what is the effect of such release, and what are the estates or interests of the various parties after such release?

A. If one of three joint tenants releases his share to one of his companions, though the jointure is destroyed as to that part, yet the two remaining parts are still held in jointure, and subject to the right of survivorship; therefore, as to one-third part of the property, the releasee holds it as tenant in common with his companion; but, as to his remaining interest as joint tenant: (see 1 St. C. 343, 8th edit.)

Q.-Three brothers, tenants in common, prior to the Lease and Release Act, 1841, conveyed part of their estate to each brother in severalty by deed of release only. Can such a deed be supported as a good conveyance?

A.-No; as tenants in common (unlike joint tenants who can release) having separate titles must make mutual conveyances as between strangers: (Will. R. P. 139, 13th edit.)

Q. Can one tenant in common of a single house or a single field separate his interest from that of the other tenant in common, and how in each case?

A.-A tenant in common might formerly have had a decree for partition although there were but one house or one field. But the court would frequently decree a pecuniary compensation to one in order to make up his share to its proper value, where the estate could not conveniently be divided into equal parts: (St. Eq. $$ 654, 657.) And now the 31 & 32 Vict. c. 40, enables the court to order a sale of the property in a case like that given by the question: (see post, Div. Eq. tit. "Partition.")

Q. How may a joint tenancy, or a tenancy in common, be severed? A.-A joint tenancy may be severed:-1. By partition. 2. By alienation without partition; as if one joint tenant conveys his estate to a third person, and creates a tenancy in common; or releases his share to the other, and turns it into an estate in severalty. (a) 3. By an accession of interest; thus, if there were two joint tenants for life, and the inheritance is purchased by or descends upon either, it is a severance of the jointure: (1 St. C. 341, 8th edit.)

(a) An agreement to sell amounts to a severance, in equity.

A tenancy in common may be dissolved:-1. By partition. 2. By uniting all the titles and interests in one tenant, by purchase or otherwise, which brings the whole to one severalty: (1 St. C. 352, 8th edit.) (a)

Q.-State the various methods of partition between tenants in common and joint tenants, distinguishing between the circumstances to which each method is specially applicable.

A.-Tenants in common and joint tenants may effect a partition.-1. By mutual agreement when all parties are sui juris. 2. By application to the Court of Chancery when the parties are not agreed. In each of these cases, mutual conveyances of their respective undivided shares must be made in order to carry the petition into complete effect. With respect to joint tenants these conveyances ought to be in the form of release, but tenants in common make mutual conveyances as between strangers. The partition must be by deed. 3. When the parties are under disability by application to the Inclosure Commissioners for England and Wales, who may make orders under their hands and seals for the partition and exchange of lands which are effectual without any further conveyance or release: (Will. R. P. 138, 13th edit.)

Q.-A. and B. are joint tenants in fee. A. devises his real estate and dies before B. Is the joint estate severed by the devise?

A.-No; a devise by a joint tenant of his share by will is no severance of the jointure: (1 St. C. 342, 8th edit.)

INCORPOREAL HEREDITAMENTS, &c.

Question.-What are incorporeal hereditaments? And state the several

sorts.

Answer.—An incorporeal hereditament is a right issuing out of a thing corporeal, or concerning or annexed to, or exercisable with the same. They are of three kinds appendant, appurtenant, and in gross. Advowsons, commons, ways, offices, annuities, and rents are all incorporeal hereditaments: (1 St. C. 646, 8th edit.; Will. R. P. 11, 241, 324, 13th edit.)

Q.-What is "an appendant incorporeal hereditament?" and give an example of one.

A. It is one which passes by a conveyance of the hereditaments to which it is appendant, as an advowson, when not separated from the manor, is appendant and passes by a grant of the manor: (Will. R. P. 324, 13th edit.)

Q. How are corporeal and incorporeal hereditaments respectively conveyed?

A. Since the 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106, s. 3, there is practically no distinction in their mode of conveyance; both being usually conveyed by deed

(a) As to partition under the Inclosure Acts, see 8 & 9 Vict. c. 118, ss. 147, 150, and Amendment Acts.

P

of grant. Formerly corporeal hereditaments were said to lie in livery, and incorporeal in grant: (Will. R. P. 241, 13th edit.; see also 25 & 26 Vict. c. 53.)

Q.-To what class of property does a right of sporting belong? and how can the owner convey it to another?

A. It is an incorporeal hereditament, and can, therefore, only be conveyed by deed of grant.

Q.-Under what description of property do "offices," as the office of sheriff, coroner and the like, fall?

A.-" Offices are a species of incorporeal hereditaments: (2 St. C. 622, 8th edit.)

1. Commons, Rents, &c.

Q.-State the chief differences between an income derived from rent and from interest on money lent on mortgage.

A. The leading distinctions are these: 1. Rent is an incorporeal hereditament and real estate; interest, personal estate. 2. Rent (service) accrues as an incident of tenure; interest does not: and the former may be of money or other chattels; interest is of money only. 3. Rent did not formerly accrue de die in diem, and therefore at common law there was no apportionment. But now, by the 33 & 34 Vict. c. 35, s. 1, rents are apportionable, like interest on money lent. So rent (with a few exceptions) can only issue out of things corporeal; interest may arise from real or personal estate. 4. Rent is liable to both property tax and land tax; interest to property tax only. 5. Rent can be distrained for at common law; interest cannot: (see Clun's case, L. C. Conv. in notis, 233, 3rd edit.)

Q.-State concisely the meaning of the terms intercommon, and common of estovers.

A.-Intercommon is where the commons of two adjacent manors join, and the inhabitants of both have immemorially fed their cattle promiscuously on each other's common. Common of estovers is a liberty of taking necessary wood for the use or furniture of a house or farm from off another person's estate, and may be claimed by grant or prescription : (Holth. L. D. 2nd edit.)

Q.-State the several kinds of rights of common, and explain the differences between them and their respective modes of transfer.

A.-There are five sorts of common: common of pasture, common of piscary, common of turbary, common of estover, and common in the soil.

1. Common of pasture is the principal and most frequent sort, being the right of feeding one's beasts on another's land, and it is either appendant, appurtenant, because of vicinage, or in gross. Appendant is the right of the copyholders of a manor to put upon the wastes of the manor their commonable beasts. This is matter of universal right, and arose from necessity. Appurtenant ariseth from no connection of tenure or necessity, but arises from grant or prescription, and may be annexed to lands in other lordships, and extend to other than commonable beasts. Because of vicinage, where the inhabitants of two townships adjoining