a stall in a market (u); land for the planting of potatoes (v) ; aftermath (w); a cattlegate (a); right of common in gross (y); the pasture of land (≈); the feeding of cows (a), sheep (b), &c. if they are to be fed upon the land (c); a dairy, or the right of milking certain cows (d), if the cows are to be fed upon land (e), and the land necessary for them be of the value of 10%. per annum (f); a coney warren (g); the fishery of a pond, with the right of taking rushes, flags, &c. from it (h), or the right alone of taking rushes, flags, &c. from a pond (i), or the right of taking sand from the bed of a river, where the soil is private property (k): have all respectively been holden tenements, which would confer a settlement. So, renting the tolls of a market (1), or other tolls (m), not being the tolls of a turnpike road (n), would confer a settlement. But hiring steam power, or the mere use of certain machinery in a mill, is not renting a tenement so as to confer a settlement (o). So, purchasing by auction growing corn nearly ripe, and cutting it, has been holden not to confer a settlement (p).

(u) R. v. Caversham, 4 B. and C. 683. ii. 885.

(v) R. v. Shenstone, Burr. S. C. 474. ii. 886.

(w) R. v. Brampton, 4 T. R. 348. ii. 887. R. v. Stoke, 2 T. R. 451. ii. 888.

R. v. Whixley, 1 T. R. 137. ii. 889.

(y) R. v. Dersingham, 7 T. R. 671. ii. 890.

(z) R. v. Minchinhampton, Burr. S. C. 316. Str. 874. ii. 891.

(a) R. v. Benneworth, 2 B. and C. 775. ii. 892. R. v. Cherry Willingham, 1 B and C. 626. ii. 893. R. v. Hollington, 3 East, 113. ii. 894. R. v. Minster, 3 M. and S. 276. ii. 895.

(b) See R. v. Bardwell, 2 B. and C. 161. ii. 896.

(c) R. v. Bardwell, 2 B. and C. 161. ii. 896. R. v. Sutton St. Edmunds, 1 B. and C. 536. ii. 897. R. v. Tisbury, 2 Nol. 19. ii. 898. R. v. Thornham, 6 B. and C. 733. ii. 899.

(d) R. v. Piddletrenthide, 3 T. R. 772. ii. 900. R. v. Tolpuddle, 4 T. R. 671. ii. 901. R. v. Stoke-upon-Trent, 10 East, 496. ii. 902. See R. v. Lockerly, Burr. S. C. 315. ii. 903. cont.

(e) R. v. Oswald Twissel, 1 B. and C. 538. cit. ii. 904. R. v. Darley Abbey, 14 East, 280. ii. 905.

(f) R. v. Minworth, 2 East, 198. ii. 906.

(g) Kinver v. Stone, Str. 678. ii. 907. R. v. Piddletrenthide, 3 T. R. 772. ii. 900.

(h) R. v. Old Alresford, 1 T. R. 358. ii. 908.

(i) R. v. All Saints, Cambridge, 1 B. and C. 23. ii. 909.

(k) R. v. All Saints, Derby, 5 M. and S. 90. ii. 910.

(1) R. v. Chipping Norton, 5 East, 239. ii. 911.

(m) R. v. Bubwith, I M. and S. 514. ii. 912. See R. v. North Duffield, 3 M. and S. 247. ii. 913.

(n) 3 Geo. 4. c. 126. s. 51. 13 Geo. 3. c. 84. s. 56; and see 54 Geo. 3. c. 170. s. 5. R. v. Elvet, 11 East, 93. ii. 914. R. v. Denbigh, 5 East, 333. ii. 915. (0) R. v. Mellor, 2 East, 189. ii. 916. R. v. Dodderhill, 8 T. R. 449. ii. 917. R. v. Tardebigg, 1 East, 528. ii. 918.

(P) R. v. Bowness, 4 M. and S. 210. ii. 919.

But now, by 59 Geo. 3. c. 50, from and after the 2d

July 1819, the tenement must consist of a dwelling-house or building, or of land, or of both (q).

Also by 6 Geo. 4. e. 57, from and after the 22d June 1825, the tenement must consist of a dwelling-house or building, or of land, or of both (~).

(9) See 59 Geo. 3. c. 50. See R. v. Tonbridge, 6 B. and C. 88. ii. 920. (r) See 6 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 2.

2. Formerly, the tenement might consist of lodgings, or a portion of a house, having an entrance in common with the landlord (s). But now, since the 2d July 1819, the tenement, if a dwelling-house or building, must be a separate and distinct dwelling-house or building (†).

(s) R. v. St. George's, Hanover Square, Burr. S. C. 692. ii. 921. R. v. St. Giles's in the Fields, Burr. S. C. 798. ii. 883. R. v. Whitechapel, 2 Bott, 100. ii. 922.

(t) 59 Geo. 3. c. 50. 6 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 2. See R. v. North Collingham, I B. and C. 578. ii. 923.

3. Under the statute of Charles, also, the tenement need not have been one and entire, but might have con sisted of several and distinct tenements, holden of different landlords (u); and if one were in one parish, and another in another (v), or if an entire tenement lay in different parishes (w), it would have been sufficient. But an occupation as tenant, could not be coupled with an occupation as landlord or freeholder (a). On the other hand, if two or more occupied as joint tenants, &c., and their moieties respectively were of the value of 10/. annually each, each of them might thereby gain a settlement (y); otherwise not (z); or if one rented 57. in severalty, and 107, in joint tenancy, &c. with another, it would confer a settlement (a).

(u) North Nibley v. Wotton-under-Edge, Set. and Rem. 86. 2 Bott, 112. ii. 924. R. v. St. Margaret, Fish Street Hill, Burr. S. C. 677. 2 Bott, 118. ii. 884. Awre v. Newnham, Burr. S. C. 756. ii. 925.

(v) R. v. Donington, Burr. S. C. 744. 2 Bott, 118. ii. 926. R. v. Sandwich, Burr. S. C. 44. ii. 927. R. v. Stapleford, 2 Bott, 114. 1 Sess. Ca. 414. ii. 928. R. v. St. Lawrence, in Winchester, Burr. S. C. 588. ii. 929. R. v. Fillongley, 1 T. R. 458. ii. 930. R. v. Culmstock, 6 T. R. 730. ii. 931.

(w) South Sydenham v. Lamerton, 1 Str. 57. 2 Bott, 128. ii. 932. St. John's v. Amwell, Str. 529. ii, 933. Elsted v. Hollibourne, Str. 849. 2 Bott, 113. ii. 934.

(z) R. v. St. John's, Glastonbury, 1 B. and A. 481. ii. 935. R. v. South Bemfleet, 1 M. and S. 154. ii, 936.

(y) R. v. Duns Tew, Burr. S. C. 398. ii. 937. R. v. Seamer, 6T. R. 554. ii. 938.

(z) Croft v. Gainsford, 2 Bott, 129. ii. 939. R. v. Marden, Burr. S. C. 311. ii. 940.

(a) See R. v. Kniveton, Burr. S. C. 499. ii. 491.

And even under the recent acts, a man may acquire a settlement, by renting a tenement consisting of several parcels, rented of several persons, at different times, provided he hold them all together for one year, and the aggregate rents of them amount to 10%. at least (b). But the whole must be situate within the parish or township, in which the settlement is to be acquired (c).

(b) R. v. North Collingham, I B. and C. 578. ii. 923. (c) See 59 Geo. 3. c. 50. 6 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 2.

4. Under the statute of Charles, all that was required, in order to gain the settlement, was, that the party should have come to settle upon a tenement of the value of 10%. a year. And therefore whether he occupied as tenant for term of years, or from year to year, or at will (d), or under a good or defective title (e), (provided the possession were not gained by fraud (ƒ),) or whether he was to pay his rent in money or in services (g), or whether the rent was to be paid by him or by a surety (h), or whether, in fact, rent was to be paid at all, or not (i), was wholly immaterial. But where the enjoyment of the tenement was merely collateral to a principal matter not relating to the tenement (k), or where it was given to a servant merely to enable him to perform the duties of his situa tion (1), no settlement could be acquired by it. It was immaterial also whether the party took the tenement for a year, or for a longer or shorter time (m), provided he held it forty days at the least. And parol evidence of this

(d) R. v. Fillongley, 1 T. R. 458. ii. 930. R. v. Chediston, 4 B. and C. 231. ii. 942. R. v. Lackenheath, 1 B. and C. 531. ii. 943. See R. v. Culmstock, 6 T. R. 730. ii. 931. R. v. St. Michael, in Coventry, 15 East, 567. ii. 944. R. v. Aldborough, 1 East, 597. ii. 945.

(e) R. v. Netherseal, 4 T. R. 258. ii. 946. R. v. Old Alresford, 1 T. R. 358. ii. 908.

(f) R. v. St. Michael's, in Bath, Doug. 630. ii. 947.

(g) R. v. St. Margaret, Fish Street Hill, Burr. S. C. 677. 2 Bott, 118. ii. 884. R. v. Melkridge, I T. R. 598. ii. 948. R. v. Minster, 3 M. and S. 276. ii. 895. R. v. Benniworth, 2 B. and C. 775. ii. 892. See R. v. Lakenheath, 1 B. and C. 531. ii. 943.

(h) R. v. Butley, Burr. S. C. 107. ii. 881. (i) R. v. Fillongley, 1 T. R. 458. ii. 930. 950.

R. v. Hooe, 4 East, 362. ii. 949.
R. v. Fritwell, 7 T. R. 197. ii.

(k) See R. v. Hammersmith, 8 T. R. 450, n. ii. 951. R. v. Seacroft, 2 M. and S. 472. ii. 223.

(1) R. v. Kelstern, 5 M. and S. 136. ii. 952. R. v. Cheshunt, 1 B. and A. 473. ii. 953. See R. v. Bardwell, 2 B. and C. 161. ii. 896. R. v. Minster, 3 M. and S. 276. ii. 895. R. v. Benniworth, 2 B. and C. 775. ii. 892. R. v. Melkridge, 1 T. R. 598. ii. 948. R. v. Shipdam, 3 D. and R. 384. ii. 954

(m) R. v. St. Matthew's, Bethnal Green, Burr. S. C. 574. ii. 878. R. v. Shurston, Burr. S. C. 474. ii, 886. R. v. Staunton-under-Bardon, Burr. S. C. 558, ii. 955.

occupancy has been holden to be admissible, although the tenant held under a written agreement (n); but in the case of a settlement under the recent statutes, it would be otherwise, because in that case it would be necessary to prove, not only the occupancy, but also the terms under which the tenement was occupied (0).

(n) R. v. Holy Trinity, Hull, 7 B. and C. 611. ii. 956. (0) See R. v. Castle Morton, 3 B. and A. 588. ii. 967.

But by stat. 59 Geo. 3. c. 50, from the 2d July 1819, the house, building, or land constituting the tenement, must be bona fide hired for the term of one whole year (p), at the sum of 101. a year at least; and the house or building shall be held, and the land occupied (q), and the rent for the same actually paid (r), for the term of one whole year at the least, by the person hiring the same.

And now, by 6 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 2, from the 22d June 1825, the dwelling-house or building, or land, must be bona fide rented by the party, for the sum of 107. a year at the least, for the term of one whole year (s), and must be occupied under such yearly hiring (1), and the rent (u) for the same, to the amount of 10., actually paid, for the term of one whole year at the least.

(p) See R. v. Tonbridge, 6 B. and C. 88. ii. 920. R. v. Bathwick, 4 D. and R. 335. ii. 957.

(q) See R. v. Stow, 4 B. and C. 87. ii. 958. R. v. Crayford, 6 B. and C. 68. ii. 959. R. v. Ampthill, 2 B. and C. 847. ii. 46. R. v. Barham, 8 B. and C. 99. ii. 960.

(r) See R. v. Carshalton, 6 B. and C. 93. ii. 961. and C. 99. ii. 960.

R. v. Barham, 8 B.

(s) See R. v. Hurstmonceaux, 7 B. and C. 551. ii. 962. (t) See R. v. Stow, 4 B. and C. 87. ii. 958.

(u) See R. v. Ramsgate, 6 B. and C. 712. ii. 963. R. v. Ashley Hay, 7 B. and C. 27. ii. 964. R. v. Kibworth Harcourt, 7 B. and C. 790. ii. 965.

5. Under the statute of Charles, the yearly value, and not the rent of the tenement, was considered: if the yearly value were 101. or more, at the time the party first began to occupy the tenement (v), it was little matter what rent (w), or whether any (x), was to be paid for it; although, in the absence of proof of the value, the reut would be deemed prima facie evidence of it (y). So, if

(v) R. v. Aston, 6 M. and S. 54. ii. 966.

(w) South Sydenham v. Lamerton, 1 Str. 57. 2 Bott, 128. ii. 932. R. v. Southwold, Burr. S. C. 140. ii. 968. R. v. Bilsdale Kirkham, Burr. S. C. 828. ii. 969. See R. v. Weston, Burr. S. C. 166. Str. 1156. ii. 715.

(1) R. v. Fillongley, 1 T. R. 458. ii. 930. R. v. Fritwell, 7 T. R. 197. ii. 950.

(y) R. v. Weston, Burr. S. C. 166. Str. 1156. ii. 715. R. v. Kniveton, Burr. S. C. 499. ii. 941.

the tenement were holden jointly by two or more, all would gain settlements, if the portion of each was of the value of 107. or upwards (z); but not otherwise (a). So, if a man took a tenement of the value of 10%. a year, and underlet a part (b), or even the whole (c) of it, he would thereby gain a settlement. And if the value of the tenement were enhanced to 10%., by the house, &c. being furnished (d), or the land cropped or tilled (e), or the taxes paid (ƒ) by the landlord, this would not prevent the settlement. But a weekly value amounting to 107. in the year, would not have been sufficient, if the value by the year, at a yearly letting, would not have amounted to 101. (g).

(z) R. v. Duns Tew, Burr. S. C. 398. ii. 937. R. v. Seamer, 6 T. R. 554. ii. 938. See R. v. Newnham, Burr. S. C. 756. ii. 970.

(a) Croft v. Gainsford, 2 Bott, 129. ii. 939. R. v. Marden, Burr. S. C. 311. ii. 940. R. v. Kniveton, Burr. S. C. 499. ii. 941.

(b) R. v. Lakenheath, 1 B. and C. 531. ii. 943. R. v. Llandverras, Burr. S. C. 571. ii. 971. See R. v. Newnham, Burr. S. C. 756. ii. 970. (c) R. v. Maghull, Cald. 429. 2 Bott, 137. ii. 972.

(d) R. v. Whitechapel, 2 Bott, 100. ii. 922. See R. v. North Bedburn, Cald. 452. 2 Bott, 101. ii. 973. And see R. v. Londonthorpe, 6 T. R. 377. ii. 882.

(e) R. v. Purley, 16 East, 126. ii. 974. R. v. West Cramore, 2 M. and S. 132. ii. 975. R. v. Ringwood, 1 M. and S. 381. ii. 976.

(f) R. v. St. Paul's, Deptford, 13 East, 320. ii. 977. R. v. Framlingham, Burr. S. C. 748. ii. 978.

(g) R. v. Hellingly, 10 East, 41. ii. 979.

But under the recent statutes, there must be a rent amounting to 107. a year at least, contracted for and paid (h); and by 6 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 2, it is provided that in cases of settlements acquired by renting a tenement after the 22d June, 1825, it shall not be necessary to prove the actual value of the tenement. Under the stat, 59 Geo. 3. c. 50, if a man rented a tenement at 10. a year, and underlet a part, this would gain a settlement, in the same manner as under the statute of Charles (i); but it may be doubted, perhaps, whether this is the case under the stat. 6 Geo. 4. c. 57. s. 2.

(h) Vide supra.

(i) R. v. Ditcheat, 9 B. and C. 176. ii, 980. confirmed by R. v. Bentley, H. 1830. MS. ii. 981.

2. As to the Party entitled to the Settlement.

The person who actually occupies the tenement (k), or (k) See R. v. Chediston, 4 B. and C. 231. ii. 942.