346 READING ON THE STATUTE OF USES. 



unto his own proper use : but it is to be added, that the 

 first saving is not to be understood as the letter implieth, 

 that feoffees to use shall be barred of their regress, in case 

 that it be of another feoffment than that whereupon the 

 statute hath wrought, but upon the same feoffment ; as if 

 the feoffee before the statute had been disseised, and the 

 disseised had made a feoffment in fee to I. D. his use, and 

 then the statute came ; this executeth the use of the second 

 feoffment ; but yet the first feoffees may make a regress, 

 and they yet claim to a use, but not by that feoffment upon 

 which the statute hath wrought. 



The third case. Now followeth the third case of the statute, touching exe- 

 Boscawen&al. cu tion of rents ; wherein the material words are four : 



1 Mod. 223. First, whereas diverse persons are seised, which hath 



bred a doubt that it should only go to rents in use at the 

 time of the statute ; but it is explained in the clause follow 

 ing, namely, as if a grant had been made to them by such 

 as are or shall be seised. 



The second word is profit ; for in the putting of the case, 

 the statute speaketh of a rent ; but after in the purview is 

 added these words, or profit. 



The third word is, etc si, scilicet, that they shall have the 

 rent as if a sufficient grant or other lawful conveyance had 

 been made and executed unto them. 



The fourth words are, the words of liberty or remedies 

 attending upon such rent, scilicet, that he shall distrain, &c. 

 and have such suits, entries, and remedies, relying again 

 with an ac si, as if the grant had been made with such col 

 lateral penalties and advantages. 



Now for the provisos ; the makers of this law did so 

 abound with policy and discerning, as they did not only 

 foresee such mischiefs as were incident to this new law im 

 mediately, but likewise such as were consequent in a remote 

 degree ; and, therefore, besides the express provisos, they 

 did add three new provisos, which are in themselves sub- 

 tractive laws : for, foreseeing that by the execution of uses, 

 wills formerly made should be overthrown ; they made an 

 ordinance for wills. Foreseeing, likewise, that by execution 

 of uses women should be doubly advanced ; they made an 

 ordinance for dowers and jointures. Foreseeing, again, that 

 the execution of uses would make frank-tenement pass by 



2 Inst 672 contracts parole, they made an ordinance for enrolments of 

 BenJ v. Bowes, bargains and sales. The two former they inserted into this 

 i Ventr.36i. law, and the third they distinguished into a law apart, but 



