Book Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1833 edition. Excerpt: ...tail by means of a fine instead of a recovery, he frequently prejudices his title by mergr ing in the remainder or reversion the base fee acquired by the fine, as he thereby not only lets in all the charges and estates made and created by the persons through whom he derived the remainder or reversion, but also renders it necessary afterwards to make out his title to the remainder or reversion, which, in many instances, is attended with great difficulty and expense. These mischiefs are, in the case of a tenant in tail in possession, produced by unskilful practitioners, from want of due attention to the different effects of a fine and recovery; the recovery expanding the estate tail and converting it into a fee simple, (1st Rep. p. 28). The commissioners therefore recommended that the substitute for fines and recoveries should in every case (except that of a tenant in tail with the immediate remainder or reversion to himself in fee, who, where there may be a prior beneficial owner, may happen to avail himself of it without his concurrence, ) have the effect of not letting in the charges and estates created by any person claiming any estate or interest to take effect on the determination or in derogation of the estate tail to be barred, or of the base fee, if the same should have been previously acquired; and that it should in this respect have precisely the same operation as a recovery. In the excepted case the substitute would produce the same effect as a fine levied by a tenant in tail in remainder with the immediate remainder or reversion to himself in fee, and would, in accordance with the law as it existed before this act, let in all charges and estates affecting this ultimate remainder or reversion. If he should be desirous of..