VI OF THE SMALL LANDOWNER 125 



a new life or lives before the expiration of the existing 

 lives, on payment of a fine. With regard to this right 

 of renewal, however, the Law Courts have decided that 

 a copyholder can only claim so to do, if he can prove a 

 constant usage of renewal upon payment of a fixed fine 

 (a reasonable fine will not suffice), while a leaseholder for 

 life must, if he wishes to renew, have given notice at the 

 proper time and prove that the lord has covenanted in 

 express terms so to do. 1 



So again, with regard to copyholds and leases for 

 years, these were generally for twenty- one years, renew- 

 able every seven years on payment of a fine. The copy- 

 holder held this right by usage of the manor, while the 

 leaseholder was not so protected. 



Now, many lords of the manor, and among them more 

 especially our Colleges and other corporate bodies, have of 

 late persistently refused to renew either copyholds for lives, 

 leases for lives, or copyholds for years and leases for years. 

 In the case of the leaseholds, whether for lives or years, the 

 lords were apparently exercising their legal right, although 

 at other times and in other countries like Ireland, the 

 custom of renewal long exercised in the past by the lease- 

 holders for lives or years, might have ripened into a tenant- 

 right. 



In the case of the copyholds my point seems to me 

 a stronger one. The copyholder, whether for lives or for 

 years, was protected by constant usage. But this was 

 difficult to prove. In some cases, indeed, the tenants 

 themselves were unwilling to renew. 2 A fine had to be 

 paid, and as this was often a heavy one generally seven 

 times the annual value of the land the sitting tenant, who 



1 Cf. Elton and Mackay, Copyholds. 



2 Cf. case of Stratton and Grindstone in Dorset, Slater, Enclosures, 

 19. 



