grant, that is, by the act of the parties, and never by the mere act of law. Now, if an estate be given to a plurality of persons without adding any restrictive, exclusive, or explanatory words, as if an estate be granted to A and B and their heirs, this makes them immediately joint tenants in fee of the lands; for the law interprets the grant so as to make all parts of it to take effect, which can only be done by creating an equal estate in them both. As, therefore, the grantor has thus united their names, the law gives them a thorough union in all other respects. For,

2. The properties of a joint estate are derived from its unity, which is fourfold; the unity of interest, the unity of title, the unity of time, and the unity of possession; or, in other words, joint tenants have one and the same interest accruing by one and the same conveyance, commencing at one and the same time, and held by one and the same undivided possession. 2 Bl. Com. 137.

And the proper and best mode of creating an estate in joint tenancy is to limit " to A B and C D and their assigns," if it be an estate for life; or "to A B and C D and their heirs," if in fee. The limitation sometimes made "to AB and CD and the survivor of them, and the heirs of such survivor," is objectionable, as it is supposed to give a contingent remainder to the survivor; for though the propriety of such a supposition may be questionable, yet it will be prudent to avoid the doubt. 2 Bl. Com. 179. Co. Lit. 188. Watk. Prin. 86.

First. They must have one and the same interest. One joint tenant cannot be entitled to one period of duration or quantity of interest in lands, and the other to a different: one cannot be tenant for life, and the other for years: one cannot be tenant in fee, and the other in tail. (Co. Lit. 188.) But if lands be limited to A and B for their lives, this makes them joint tenants of the freehold; if to A and B and their heirs, it makes them joint tenants of the inheritance. (Lit. s. 277.) If land be granted to A and B for

their lives, and to the heirs of A, here A and B are joint tenants of the freehold during their respective lives, and A has the remainder of the fee in severalty; or if land be given to A and B and the heirs of the body of A, here both have a joint estate for life, and A has a several remainder in tail. (Lit. s. 285.)-Secondly. Joint tenants must have also an unity of title: their estate must be created by one and the same act, whether legal or illegal; as by one and the same grant, or by one and the same disseisin. (Lit. s. 278.) Joint tenancy cannot arise by descent or act of law, but merely by purchase or acquisition by the act of the party; and unless that act be one and the same, the two tenants would have different titles; and if they had different titles, one might prove good and the other bad, which would absolutely destroy the jointure.-Thirdly. There must also be an unity of time their estates must be vested at one and the same period, as well as by one and the same title; as in the case of a present estate made to A and B, or a remainder in fee to A and B, after a particular estate; in either case A and B are joint tenants of this present estate, or this vested remainder. But if after a lease for life the remainder be limited to the heirs of A and B, and during the continuance of the particular estate A dies, which vests the remainder of one moiety in his heir, and then B dies, whereby the other moiety becomes vested in the heir of B; now A's heir and B's heir are not joint tenants of this remainder, but tenants in common; for one moiety vested at one time, and the other moiety vested at another. (Co. Lit. 188.) But where a feoffment was made to the use of a man and such wife as he should afterwards marry for the term of their lives, and he afterwards married; in this case it seems to have been held that the husband and wife had a joint estate, though vested at different times, (Dyer, 340. 1 Rep. 101.) because the use of the wife's estate was in abeyance and dormant till the intermarriage, and being then awakened, had relation back, and took effect from the original time of creation.-Lastly.

In joint tenancy there must be an unity of possession. Joint tenants are said to be seised per mie et per tout, by the half or moiety, and by all; that is, they each of them have the entire possession as well of every parcel as of the whole. (Lit. s. 288. 5 Rep. 10.) They have not one of them a seisin of one half or a moiety, and the other of the other moiety; neither can one be exclusively seised of one acre and his companion of another, but each has an undivided moiety of the whole, and not the whole of an undivided moiety, (Bract. l. 5. b.5. c. 26); and therefore, if an estate in fee be given to a man and his wife, they are neither properly joint tenants nor tenants in common; for husband and wife being considered as one person in law, they cannot take the estate by moieties, but both are seised of the entirety, per tout et non per mie; the consequence of which is, that neither the husband nor the wife can dispose of any part without the assent of the other, but the whole must remain in the survivor. Lit. s. 665. Co. Lit. 187. Bro. Abr. 1. cui et vita, 8. 2 Vern. 120. 2 Lev. 39. 2 Bl. Com. 182. And if a grant is made of a joint estate to husband and wife and a third person, the husband and wife shall have one moiety, and the third person the other moiety, in the same manner as if it had been only granted to two persons. So, if the grant is to husband and wife and two others, the husband and wife take one third in joint tenancy. Lit.

s. 291.

Upon these principles of a thorough and intimate union of interest and possession, depend many other consequences and incidents to the joint tenants' estate: thus, if two joint tenants grant a parol or verbal lease of their land, reserving rent to be paid to one of them, it shall enure to both in respect of the joint reversion. Co. Lit. 214.

If their lessor surrenders his lease to one of them, it shall also enure to both, because of the privity or relation of their estate: on the same reason, livery of seisin made to one joint tenant shall enure to both of them; and the entry or

re-entry of one joint tenant is as effectual in law as if it were the act of both. Co. Lit. 192. 49. 319. 364.

But if two or more joint tenants be seised of an advowson, and they present different clerks, the bishop may refuse to admit either, because neither joint tenant has a several right of patronage, but each is seised of the whole; and if they do not both agree within six months, the right of presentation shall lapse. But the ordinary may, if he pleases, admit a clerk presented by either for the good of the church, that divine service may be regularly performed, which is no more than he would otherwise be entitled to do, in case their disagreement continued so as to incur a lapse; and if the clerk of one joint tenant be so admitted, this shall keep up the title in both of them, in respect to the privity and union of their estate. (Co Lit. 185.) Upon the same ground it is held, that one joint tenant cannot have an action against another for trespass in respect of this land, (3 Levin. 262,) for each has an equal right to enter on any part of it. But one joint tenant is not capable by himself to do any act, which may tend to defeat or injure the estate of the other; as, to grant leases or copyholds, (1 Leon. 334); and if any waste be done which tends to the destruction of the inheritance, one joint tenant may have an action of waste against the other by construction of stat. Westm. 2. c. 22. 2 Inst. 403. 2 Black. Com. 182.

But this action has fallen into total disuse; and the present practice to compel an account between joint tenants is to apply to a Court of equity; which is also the jurisdiction generally resorted to, in order to obtain a partition between joint tenants, parceners, and tenants in common. Com. Dig. Chanc. Mitf. 109.

From the same principle also arises the remaining grand incident of joint estates, viz. the doctrine of survivorship, by which, when two or more persons are seised of a joint estate of inheritance for their own lives or pour autre vie, or are jointly possessed of any chattel interest, the entire tenancy upon the decease of any of them remains to the survivors;

and at length to the last survivor; and he shall be entitled to the whole of the estate, whatever it be, whether an inheritance or a common freehold only, or even a less estate. (Lit. s. 280, 281.) This is the natural and regular consequence of the union and entirety of their interest. The union of two joint tenants is not only equal and similar, but is also one and the same. One has not originally a distinct moiety from the other; but if by any subsequent act (as by alienation or forfeiture of either), the interest becomes separate and distinct, the joint tenancy instantly ceases; but while it continues, each of two joint tenants has a concurrent interest in the whole, and therefore on the death of his companion the sole interest in the whole remains in the survivor: for the interest which the survivor originally had is clearly not divested by the death of his companion, and no other person can now claim to have a joint estate with him, for no one can now have an interest in the whole, accruing by the same title, and taking effect at the same time with his own; neither can any one claim a separate interest in any part of the tenements, for that would be to deprive the survivor of the right which he has in all and every part. As, therefore, the survivor's original interest in the whole still remains, and as no one can now be admitted, either jointly or severally, to any share with him therein, it follows that his own interest must now be entire and several, and that he alone shall be entitled to the whole estate (whatever it be) that was created by the original grant. 2 Black. Com. 183.

This right of survivorship ought to be mutual; which is one reason why the king (Co. Lit. 190. Finch. 1. 83) nor any corporation (2 Lev. 12) can be a joint tenant with a private person. For here there is no mutuality: the private person has not the most remote chance of being seised of the entirety by benefit of survivorship, for the king and a corporation can never die. Ibid.

But Lord Coke says expressly, "There may be joint tenants, though there be not equal benefit of survivorship; as