66 ENCLOSURES O] HIE ...TEENTH TIT 



trebling, and now and then seven times increasing theii 

 fines, driving them for every trifle to lose and forfeit thei 

 tenures/ 1 



This remark of Harrison seems to guide us to a trv 

 conclusion. It would appear that in a great majority < 

 cases the real struggle was over the attempt of the lords 

 prove that the copyhold tenures were for life orlTves, a 

 not of inheritance, or to turn these copyholds into lea 

 for years. In short, no sooner has the copyholder gaii 

 legal recognition of his holding than the struggle beg 

 en the question whether their tenures are true copyhold 

 inheritance or not. 



The primary motive here was not ? perhaps, the des 

 to fevuvj^sn mnnh as f.hft hope nf thereby wringing m 

 money from the tenant. In the case of copyholds 

 rents had, in most cases, become fixed at a very low K 

 and so had the heriot or fine on admission of an heir t 

 copyhold of inheritance. Consequently the depreciation 

 the value of money at the time gave to such copyholders 

 Prof. Maitland has said, 'a regular unearned incremei 

 The only way in which the lords could hope to mere 



*f _ y_ - - "' - * , 



tKeir revenue was by proving that the copyholds were 

 life or lives, and not of inheritance ; or by substituting lea 

 for lives, pr leases for years at rack rent, for copyholds. 

 tfilT iirst change the lords were able to increase the fines 

 renewal, and on many manors the fines were the ch 

 source of revenue ; while by the second they could rs 

 their rents as well. 



It is noticeable that, as before mentioned, the statu 

 do not speak of direct eviction, that the majority of 

 reported cases deal with these questions, more especially 

 fines, and that this is evidently the burning question in 



1 Description of England, p. 318. 



