such kinsman when the common ancestor is a male, and next Rules of descent. after the common ancestor, when such ancestor is a female. Rule 8. In the admission of female paternal ancestors, the mother of the more remote male paternal ancestor, and her heirs, shall be preferred to the mother of a less remote male paternal ancestor, and her heirs; and in the admission of female maternal ancestors, the mother of the more remote male maternal ancestor, and her heirs, shall be preferred to the mother of a less remote male maternal ancestor, and her heirs. Act. Rule 9. The last rule is introduced by Lord St. Leonards' Act Lord St. (22 & 23 Vict. c. 35), viz., "where there shall be a total Leonards' failure of heirs of the purchaser, or where any land shall be descendible as if an ancestor had been the purchaser thereof, and there shall be total failure of the heirs of such ancestor, then and in every such case the land shall descend, and the descent shall thenceforth be traced, from the person last entitled to the land, as if he had been the purchaser thereof." In connection with the custom of descent it should also be remembered that it is an established rule that proof of a custom of descent contrary to the course of the common law prevailing in a nearer degree of consanguinity is no proof of such custom extending to a more remote degree (1). And now, having enumerated the canons of descent, we may Cases as to briefly notice a few of the more important cases on the subject. descent. One important case which was decided many years ago shall be noticed subsequently when we come to speak of coparceners (post, p. 62), and another in the chapter on copyholds (post, p. 193), but the following cases may be more appropriately considered in the present place. A testator having inherited lands ex parte materná devised them to trustees in fee upon trust for his widow for life, and, on her decease, to convey the same to such person as should answer the description of his "heir-at-law," and died, leaving only collateral heirs; it was held that the heir general, and not the heir ex parte materna, was entitled. Lord Hatherley, then Vice-Chancellor Wood, in delivering judgment, said, "There is not any authority precisely in point, but the principle must be, that when once the descent is broken by a devise of the whole fee simple to trustees, upon trust to convey it to the testator's heir, they are bound to convey it to the person who is heir of the testator at the common law" (2). (1) Per Crompton, J.. 2 H. & N. 661. Title to land in England. Aliens. The question how the paternal ancestors are to be exhausted so as to let in the female line, was considered by the Court in 1877, when the case was stated as follows, by one of the judges: "I think the true meaning of the section is that, when there is no reasonable possibility of ascertaining that there are descendants from the paternal ancestors-I mean, of course, a reasonable possibility, after due and sufficient investigation and inquiry, and what may be a due and sufficient investigation must depend on the circumstances of the case--then descendants of the maternal ancestors must be sought for. In the present case, all the descendants of paternal ancestors who have been born within 150 years have been exhausted. The intestate was the last of those descendants. Therefore we are considering a case in which certainly there has been a very full and very complete investigation" (1). The title to land in England is governed by English law, and it has accordingly been held that when a person is not legitimate at English law, though he be legitimate by the law of the country where he is domiciled, he cannot inherit nor can inheritance be traced from him (2). An interesting case was decided on the subject of descent in 1884 (3). The question arose whether the descent as to certain real property was to be traced ex parte paterná or ex parte materná. The propositus was entitled to an equitable estate in the property under his father's will, and also to a legal estate which descended to him from his mother. The Court decided that as the equitable estate merged in the legal, the descent must be regulated by the legal estate, and that therefore on his death, intestate and without issue, the property descended to the heir of his maternal grandmother, who was the last purchaser of the legal estate, and not to his own heir. An exception from the right of holding land which formerly existed in English law, but has now been abolished by legislation, may here be noticed. The Naturalization Act, 1870, enacts that real and personal property of every description may be taken, acquired, held, and disposed of by an alien in the same manner in all respects as by a natural-born British subject; and a title to real and personal property of every description may be derived through, from, or in succession to an alien, in the same manner in all respects, (1) Per Baggallay, L.J., in Greaves v. Greenwood, 2 Exch. Div. 289. (2) Doe v. Vardill, 2 Cl. & Fin. 571; Re Don, 4 Drew. 191. (3) In re Douglas. Wood v. Douglas, 28 Ch. D. 327. as through, from, or in succession to a natural-born British subject (1). Another "incident" of the fee simple estate which must be Escheat. noticed is that it is liable to escheat, which may be defined or described as follows:-It is the reverter of lands held for an estate in fee simple to the next superior lord propter defectum tenentis when the tenant in fee simple dies without having alienated his estate in his lifetime or by his will, and where there is a total failure of his heirs. The law with regard to escheat was extended to equitable estates and to incorporeal hereditaments by the Intestates Estates Act, 1884, which provides that after the passing of the Act (2) where a person dies without an heir, and intestate in respect of any real estate, consisting of any estate or interest, whether legal or equitable, in any incorporeal hereditaments, or of any equitable estate or interest in any corporeal hereditaments, whether devised or not devised to trustees by the will of such person, the law of escheat shall apply in the same manner as if the estate or interest above-mentioned were a legal estate in corporeal hereditaments (sect. 4). (3) The subsequent sections of the Act provide that the Crown may waive its rights, and that where any beneficial interest in the real estate of any deceased person is "owing to the failure of the objects of the devise, or other circumstances happening before or after the death of such person, in whole or in part not effectually disposed of," such person shall be deemed, for the purposes of the Act, "to have died intestate in respect of such part of the said beneficial interest as is ineffectually disposed of." With regard to forfeiture for treason or felony, an Act passed Forfeiture. in the year 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 23), provides that, from and after the 4th July, 1870, no confession, verdict, inquest, conviction, or judgment of or for any treason or felony, or felo de se, shall cause any attainder or corruption of blood or any forfeiture or escheat. But nothing in the Act is to affect the law of forfeiture consequent upon outlawry. (1) The Naturalization Act, 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 14). It is not retrospective: Sharp v. St. Sauveur, L. R. 7 Ch. 343, and ships are expressly excepted from the property which may be so held. See also as to naturalization, 33 & 31 Vict. c. 102; 35 & 36 Vict. c. 39. (2) Challis' Real Property, p. 33, et seq. (3) 47 & 48 Vict. c. 71, ss. 4, 6, 7, and see as to procedure with respect to escheat, 50 & 51 Vict. c. 53, under which rules have been made (see Weekly Notes, Aug. 3, 1889). See generally as to escheat and forfeiture, Attorney-General v. Sands, Tudor's Real Property Cases, 3rd ed. p. 760, et seq. And now, having considered the principal characteristics of the estate in fee simple, we shall hereafter regard it in another respect, viz. in respect of the modes in which its owner may deal with it. The estate may be alienated wholly or partially by act inter vivos or by will. These subjects shall be subsequently considered under the headings of Conveyances, Mortgages, Leases, Settlements, and Wills, but our next chapter will be concerned with estates in which there is concurrent ownership. The rules of descent have been cleverly put in verse as follows:: "Descent from the purchaser is traced; And males before the females must be placed; Law Students' Journal, (1) Sometimes given thus: instead of "age will prevail," read “eldest of males." CHAPTER VII. JOINT ESTATES. Joint estates or interests in lands and tenements held in "concurrent ownership," as distinguished from sole or several estates, are divided into four classes; these are: I. Estates in joint tenancy: II. Tenancies in common: III. Estates in parcenary or coparcenary: I. A joint tenancy is where property is conveyed, devised, or bequeathed to persons jointly, either for years, lives, pur autre vie, or in fee (1). A joint tenancy cannot arise by descent or operation of law. Each joint tenant is seized of the whole and every part, or, as it is termed in old Norman French, per my et per tout (2). A joint tenancy is characterised by "four unities," viz. :(1) Unity of interest: (2) Unity of title: Joint estates. Four unities of joint tenancy. (3) Unity of time : (4) Unity of possession. (1) Unity of interest.-The estates of all the joint tenants must be the same in quantity or extent. Thus, an estate cannot be given to one for life and to the other for years, as joint tenants. Two, however, may hold as tenants for their lives, with remainder to one in fee or in tail. (2) Unity of title, viz. the estate must be created by the same act or instrument, whether legal or illegal : The doctrine of unity of title received a curious illustration in a case which came before the late Lord Chancellor Hatherley in 1871. Robert Ward and Bryan Ward came into lawful posses (1) Litt. ss. 280, 281. (2) Another explanation which has been given of these words is that the word mie signifies nothing, and that the meaning is that the joint tenant is entitled to nothing separately, and |