AGREEMENT NOT UNDER SEAL. 413 



the lease void, as not being by deed, still made it void only as a lease, 

 and did not prevent it from indicating the terms on which Savage held 

 as tenant from year to year ; and that, consequently, Savage's tenancy 

 might be determined, during the term, by a half-year's notice, but the 

 end of the term expired without notice. Coleridge J. said, "By sec. 4 

 of 7 & 8 Vict. c. 76, no lease in writing of any freehold land 'shall be 

 valid as a lease,' ' unless the same shall be made by deed ; but any 

 agreement in writing to let ' ' any such land shall be valid and take 

 effect as an agreement to execute a lease ; ' ' and the person who shall 

 be in possession of the land in pursuance of any agreement to let, may, 

 from payment of rent or other circumstances, be construed to be a 

 tenant from year to year.' 



"Under this section Do^ clem. Davenish v. Moffat was decided. There 

 the defendant tooli possession of land under the terms of a iiritten agree- 

 ment not under seal, which, before stat. 7 & 8 Vict. c. 76, came into 

 operation, would have operated as a demise for three years ; and it was 

 held that he became tenant from year to year, subject to the terms of 

 the agreement ; and that the consequence of this was, that at the end of 

 the three years the tenancy expired without any notice to quit. That 

 statute is repealed by stat. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106 ; sec. 3 of which substi- 

 tutes, for sec. 4 of the repealed act, an enactment somewhat diflFerently 

 expressed, and makes a lease required by law to be in writing, of tene- 

 ments or hereditaments, ' void at law, unless made by deed.' " 



The right to enter for condition hrolcen is not included in the 8 & 9 Vict. 

 c. 106, s. 6, which enacts that a right of entry may be disposed of by 

 deed {Himt v. Bishop). And per Cressivell J. : ''A lease in writing, not 

 Ig deed, void under stat. 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106, does not require a stamp " 

 {Jilott V. Turnage). 



By sec. 3 of statute 8 & 9 Vict. c. 106, which repealed the statute 

 7 & 8 Vict. c. 76, it is enacted " That a lease required by law to be in 

 writing of any tenements or hereditaments made after the 1st day of 

 October, 1845, shall be void at law unless made by deed." The effect of 

 this statute is, that an instrument u'hich purports to let premises for a 

 period of more than three years, and which therefore is void as a lease in 

 not leing sealed, is still good as an agreenmit, and the tenant who enters 

 under it becomes tenant from year to year according to its terms, so far 

 as those terms are applicable to a tenancy from year to year {Heard v. 

 Campli7i). 



The question in Stratton v. Pettit was whether the instrument set 

 forth in the declaration Avas a lease or an agreement. And p)er Jet vis C.J. : 

 " The rule to be collected from all the cases is, that the intention of the 

 parties, as declared ly the ivords of the instrument, must govern the con- 



