U N D 



U N D 



age, landlords then relying more on the fidelity of their 

 tenants and retainers than on the proteftion of the laws, 

 from the municipal regulations of the country, which ren- 

 dered proprietors of the land refponfible for the conduft of 

 thofe who refided upon their eftatcs ; and alfo from the na- 

 ture of the prejldt'wns then exigible from tenants, which, 

 confifting almoil entirely of perfonal fer\'ices, brought them 

 nearer the (late of menial fervants than that of modern 

 farmers. Hence it was, it is faid, that a leafe, during thefe 

 periods, was confidered as a contract JlriB't juris. If given 

 to a woman, it fell by her fubfequent marriage ; if to a man, 

 it became void by his death. It was alike incapable of vo- 

 luntary, as of judicial tranfmiffion. But, for more than a 

 century part, this contraft having been treated by the 

 legiflature, and wifely enforced by the judges there, in con- 

 formity to the fenfe of the country, has, it is afferted, re- 

 gained much of its original nature. It is no longer the per- 

 fonal fervices of the tenant, or his peculiar qualifications, 

 but the rent in money which he can afford to pay, which 

 a landlord has in view. Accordingly, the court of feflion 

 there has found, that the principle of law, regarding leafes 

 or tacks not bearing to affignees, being unadignable without 

 the confent of the heritor, does not apply to urban tene- 

 ments, and made decifions in conformity to it. And that 

 as to fubtacks or leafes, it has been obferved, that there was 

 not the fame reafon againft fuftaining them as againft fuf- 

 taining aflignations ; becaufe, by a fubfet or underletting 

 tliere, tjie principal tenant or tackfman is not changed. On 

 that principle, the power of granting them feems to have 

 been ever, until of late, recognifed as implied in a leafe, by 

 the law of Scotland, as it was by that of the Roman. This 

 power was, however, queftioned in the years 1686 and 

 1687. The hrft cafe was that of a leafe or tack of nineteen 

 years let to a perfon, fecluding his affignees. It was con- 

 tended, that the exclufion of aflignees implied the exclufion 

 of fubtcnants, or underletting ; but the court of feflion there 

 decided that the leafe or tack might be fubfet. And it ad- 

 hered to the fame judgment, in a fimilar cafe^ decided in the 

 following year. 



It may be noticed, that this implied power in leafes or 

 tacks, of fubfetting or underletting, appears to have been 

 underftood to be a fettled principle of law there until lately ; 

 and that that material point of public policy was not altered 

 by any a« of the legiflature, but by a decifion of the above 

 court. It was firft confidered on general grounds, it is 

 faid, in the cafe of a miffive of a leafe or tack, to endure 

 nineteen years, which made no mention of aflignees or fub- 

 tenants, and was found by it neither capable of being af- 

 figned or fubfet. And there have fince been feveral decifions 

 to the fame purpofe ; but that as none of them have pro- 

 bably yet been appealed, and received the judgment of the 

 houfe of peers, until then it may be underftood that the law 

 is as interpreted in the above cafes. 



Upon the whole, it can hardly be doubted that it would 

 be more conducive to the improvement of the country, and 

 its agriculture, if all reftriflions againft afligning and fub- 

 fetting or underletting were abohlhed and done away with, 

 than that the free difpofal of property of the farm kind 

 fliould receive, by implication, additional fetters. The ne- 

 cefllty and utihty of this muft indeed be evident in a great 

 many different points of confideration. See Farm, Lease, 

 and Tack. 



UNDER-LOCKS, in Sheep Hujbandry, the locks of 

 foiled wool which hang under the bellies of the fheep, efpe- 

 cially about their udders and tails. The operation of re- 

 moving iuch locks is termed under-locking in mod fheep 

 diftrifts. See Sheep. 



UNDERMINING. See Sap. 



UNDER-RUN, To, in Sea Language, is to pafs under, 

 or examine any part of a cable or other rope, in order to 

 difcover whether it is damaged or entangled. It is ufual to 

 under-run the cables in particular harbours, as well to 

 cleanfe them with brooms and brulhes from any filth, ooze, 

 fhells, &c. coUefted in the itream, as to examine whether 

 they have fuftained any injury under the furface of the 

 water ; as from rocky ground, or by the friftion againft 

 other cables or anchors. 



Under-run a Tackle, To, is to feparate the feveral parts 

 of which it is compofed, and range them in order, from one 

 block to the other ; fo that the general effort may not be 

 interrupted, when it is put in motion. Falconer. 



UNDER-SAIL, denotes the fl;ate of a (hip when (he is 

 loofened from her moorings, and under the government of 

 her fails and rudder. 



UNDER-SHERIFF, Suh-vke-comes. See Sheriff. 



UNDER-SHOOT and Sprout, in Agriculture and 

 Gnrdening, that fort of (hoot or fprout which rifes from the 

 under-part of a tree or vegetable of any kind. The under- 

 (hoots of trees and (hrubs are often liable to be weak, and 

 to want vigour, unlefs they are kept well thinned in their 

 branches, and, of courfe, to be injurious and unlightly in 

 the growth of the plants. But in fome field and culinary 

 vegetables, under-fprouts frequently form a fweet, tender, 

 and ufeful food. See Shoot and Sprout. 



UNDER-SHRUB. See Suffrutex. 



UNDER-SITTER, an inmate. See Inmates. 



UNDERSTANDING, Intellectus, is defined, by 

 the Peripatetics, to be a faculty of the reafonable foul, con- 

 verfant about intelligible things, confidered as intelligible. 

 They alfo make it twofold ; viz. active and paffive. 



Understanding, Adive, IntelieSus Agens, they hold 

 that faculty of the foul, by which the fpecies and images of 

 intelligible things are framed, on occafion of the prefencc of 

 phantafms or appearances thereof. For, maintaining the 

 intelleft to be immaterial, they hold it impoffible it fliould 

 be difpofed to think by any difproportionate phantafm.i of 

 mere body ; and, therefore, that it is obliged to frame other 

 proportionate fpecies of itfelf ; and hence its denomination 

 affive. 



Understanding, Pajfive, IntelleEtus Patiens, is that 

 which, receiving the fpecies framed by the aftive under- 

 ftanding, breaks forth into aftual knowledge. 



The moderns fet afide the Peripatetic notion of an aft ive 

 underftanding. The Cartefians define the underftanding to 

 be that faculty, by which the mind, converfing with, and, 

 as it were, intent on itfelf, evidently knows v.hat is true in 

 any thing not exceeding its capacity. 



The Corpufcular philofophers define the underftanding to 

 be a faculty, expreflive of things which ftrike on the ex- 

 ternal feiifes, either by their images, or their effefts, and fo 

 enter the mind. Their great doArine is, Nihil ejfe in inlil- 

 ledu, quod nan prius fuerit in fenfu ; and to this doftrine our 

 famous Mr. Locke, and moll of the lateft Englilh philo- 

 fophers, fubfcribe. 



The Cartefians exclaim much againft it ; and between 

 thefe and the Corpufcularians there is this farther difference, 

 that the latter make the judgment to belong to the under- 

 ftanding ; but the former to the will. 



Hence, according to the moft approved opinion of the 

 Corpufcularians, the underftanding has two oflSces, viz,, 

 perception and judgment ; according to the Cartefians, it has 

 only one, viz. perception. 



Understanding is alfo ufed for the aft, exercife, or 

 4 exertion. 



