20. Actus inceptus cujus perfectio pendet ex voluntate partium revocari potest; si autem pendet ex voluntate tertiæ personæ, vel ex contingenti, revocari non potest.

21. Clausula vel dispositio inutilis per præsumptionem remotam vel causam ex post facto non fulcitur.

22. Non videtur consensum retinuisse, si quis ex præscripto minantis aliquid immutavit.

23. Licita bene miscentur, formula nisi juris obstet.

24 Præsentia corporis tollit errorem nominis, et veritas nominis tollit errorem demonstrationis.

25. Ambiguitas verborum latens verificatione suppletur; nam quod ex facto oritur ambiguum verificatione facti tollitur.

THE

MAXIMS OF THE LAW.

REGULA I.

In jure non remota causa, sed proxima spectatur.

Ir were infinite for the law to judge the causes of causes, and their impulsions one of another: therefore it contenteth itself with the immediate cause; and judgeth of acts by that, without looking to any further degree.

Dy. f. 1, 2.

As if an annuity be granted pro consilio impenso et impenden 6 II. 8. do, and the grantee commit treason, whereby he is imprisoned, so that the grantor cannot have access unto him for his counsel; yet, nevertheless, the annuity is not determined by this nonfeasance. Yet it was the grantee's act and default to commit the treason, whereby the imprisonment grew but the law looketh not so far, but excuseth him, because the not giving counsel was compulsory and not voluntary, in regard of the imprisonment.

et seq.
2 H. 4. f. 5. p..

18.

So if a parson make a lease, and be deprived, or resign, the Litt. secs. 643. successor shall avoid the lease: and yet the cause of deprivation, and more strongly of a resignation, moved from the party him- 26. 8. f. 2. self: but the law regardeth not that; because the admission of the new incumbent is the act of the ordinary.'

pl. 3.

pl. 3.

2 So if I be seised of an advowson in gross, and a usurpa- 5 H. 7. f. 35. tion be had against me, and at the next avoidance I usurp arere, I shall be remitted: and yet the presentation, which is the act remote, is mine own act; but the admission of my clerk, whereby the inheritance is reduced to me, is the act of the ordinary.

The Cambridge MS. states the law as to deprivation only; adding: “But of a resignation it is otherwise; for that is merely the act of the party."

2 Omitted in Camb. MS.

Dy. f. 1.

12 H. 4. f. 23.

pl. 6.

Winnington's case, 2 Co. 59.

ter.]

So if I covenant with I. S. a stranger, in consideration of natural love to my son, to stand seised to the use of the said I. S. to the intent he shall enfeoff my son; by this no use ariseth to I. S. because the law doth respect that there is no immediate consideration between me and I. S.

'So if I be bound to enter into a statute before the mayor of the staple at such a day for the security of a hundred pounds, and the obligee, before the day, accept of me a lease of a house in satisfaction; this is no plea in debt upon my obligation: and yet the end of that statute was but security of money; but because the entering into this statute itself, which is the immediate act whereto I am bound, is a corporal act which lieth not in satisfaction, therefore the law taketh no consideration that the remote intent was for money.

So if I make a feoffinent in fee upon condition that the feoffee 2[37 EL. Ches- shall enfeoff over, and the feoffee be disseised, and a descent cast, and then the feoffee bind himself in a statute, which statute is discharged before the recovery of the land: this is not breach of the condition, because the land was never liable to the statute; and the possibility that it should be liable upon the recovery the law doth not respect.

See Blackstone Com.

So if I enfeoff two upon condition to enfeoff, and one of them take a wife; the condition is not broken: and yet there is a remote possibility that the joint-tenant may die, and then the

feme is intitled to dower.

sex,

and

So if a man purchase land in fee-simple, and die without Book 2.c.14. issue: in the first degree the law respecteth dignity of not proximity; and therefore the remote heir on the part of the father shall have it before the near heir on the part of the mother: but in any degree paramount the first the law respecteth it not; and therefore the near heir by the grandmother on the part of the father shall have it before the remote heir of the grandfather on the part of the father.

This rule faileth in covinous acts, which though they be conveyed through many degrees and reaches, yet the law taketh heed to the corrupt beginning, and counteth all as one entire act.

As if a feoffment be made of lands held by knight's service to

Omitted in Camb, MS.

2 This marginal reference must have been made, I think, while the case stood as a judgment of the court at Chester, and before it was brought before the Queen's Bench,

I. S. upon condition that he within a certain time shall enfeoff I. D. which feoffment to I. D. shall be to the use of the wife of the first feoffor for her jointure, &c.; this feoffment is within the statute of 32 H. VIII. nam dolus circuitu non purgatur.

[Cattelyn and

others in

Stoel's case.]

In like manner this rule holdeth not in criminal acts, except they have a full interruption; because when the intention is matter of substance and that which the law doth principally behold, there the first motive will be principally regarded, and not the last impulsion. As if I. S. of malice prepense discharge a pistol at I. D. and miss him, whereupon he throws down his pistol and flies, and I. D. pursueth him to kill him, whereupon he turneth and killeth I. D. with a dagger; if the law should consider the last impulsive cause, it should say that it was in his own defence: but the law is otherwise, for it is but a pursuance and extention of the first murderous intent. 1 But if I. S. had 44 Ed. 3. f. 44. fallen down, his dagger drawn, and I. D. had fallen by haste upon his dagger, there I. D. had been felo de se, and I. S. should go quit.

Also you may not confound the act with the execution of the act; nor the entire act with the last part, or the consummation of the act.

pl. 55.

[21 Eliz.]

Dy. f. 4, 5.

For if a disseisor enter into religion, the immediate cause is Lit. sec. 410. from the party, though the descent be cast by act in law: but the law doth but execute the act which the party procureth; and therefore the descent shall not bind. Et è converso; If a lease for years be made rendering rent, and the lessee make a feoffment of part, and the lessor enter; the immediate cause is from the law in respect of the forfeiture, though the entry be the act of the party but that is but the pursuance and putting in execution of the title which the law giveth; and therefore the rent or condition shall be apportioned.

So in the binding of a right by a descent, you are to consider the whole time from the disseisin to the descent cast; and if at all times the person be not privileged, the descent binds.

And therefore, if a feme covert be disseised, and the baron 9 H.7.24. Dy.f.143, 144. dieth, and she taketh a new husband, and then the descent is

'Omitted in Camb. MS.

The Camb. MS. has: "the act itself with the execution only of the act, and so the cause of the act with the cause of the execution of the act, and by that means make the immediate cause a remote cause."

The remaining cases under this rule are omitted in the Camb. MS. They would not have illustrated the rule as there enunciated, and given in the preceding note,

Dy. f. 159.

cast; or if a man that is not infra quatuor maria be disseised, and return into England, and go over sea again, and then a descent is cast; this descent bindeth, because of the interim when the persons might have entered: and the law respecteth not the state of the person at the last time of the descent cast, but a continuance from the very disseisin to the descent.

So if baron and feme be, and they join in a feoffment of the wife's land rendering a rent, and the baron die, and the feme take a new husband before any rent-day, and he accept the rent; the feoffment is affirmed for ever.

50 E. 3. f. 24. pl. 16.

REGULA II.

Non potest adduci exceptio ejusdem rei, cujus petitur dissolutio.

IT were impertinent and contrary in itself for the law to' allow of a plea in bar of such matter as is to be defeated by the same suit for it is included; and otherwise a man should never come to the end and effect of his suit, but be cut off in the

way.

And therefore, if tenant in tail of a manor whereunto a villain is regardant discontinue, and die, and the right of the entail descend unto the villain himself, who brings formedon, and the discontinuee pleadeth villenage; this is no plea: because the devester of the manor, which is the intention of the suit, doth include this plea; because it determineth the villenage.

2 So if tenant in ancient demesne be disseised by the lord, whereby the seigniory is suspended, and the disseisee bring his assize in the court of the lord, frank fee is no plea: because the suit is to undo the disseisin, and so to revive the seigniory in ancient demesne.

So if a man be attainted and executed, and the heir bring error upon the attainder, and corruption of blood by the same attainder be pleaded to interrupt his conveying in the same writ of error; this is no plea: for then he were without remedy ever to reverse the attainder.3

1 The Camb. MS. has: "to give a man remedies, and then to cut him off the means to come at the effect of his suit by an allegation collateral, which the principal suit doth include and make an end of."

2 Omitted in Camb. MS.

The Camb. MS. cites 11 Hen. 4. fo. 65, pl. 22, the case of executors bringing error to reverse an outlawry, which may have suggested or confirmed Bacon in his