effected, when once we trace from the father, N° 10 will certainly inherit. But, as the fact is otherwise, as the fon is the person last seised, shall not N° 11 confeffedly fucceed? "The negative application of the rule is this. Because the iffue of Luke and Frances Kempe, or N° 11, fhould not have inherited to the father, therefore they shall not inherit to the fon. Now it is certain, that not one person of those represented in the table of descents, from N° 14 to N° 20 inclufive, shall ever inherit the father; but who will be found to contend, that therefore not one of them fhall inherit the fon? "However, by virtue of this liberal rule, John Stiles is utterly excluded, as though he had never existed; notwithstanding we are told by the author himself that John Stiles held the land as a feud of indefinite antiquity. Let us then for a moment admit of the delufion, and refer ourselves to Geoffrey Stiles the father. Now, if the heirs of Chriftian Smith fhall inherit John Stiles, as by the table they do, by parity of reafon must not the heir of Ann Godfrey fucceed to Geoffrey Stiles? To hesitate were useless, their respective relation is the fame; if the heirs of the greatgrandmother shall fucceed in one inftance, they fhall in another, or there is no virtue in confiftency. Nevertheless, having once fecured Geoffrey Stiles as the propofitus, the fyftem of the table of defcents is deferted; and appeal is made to the refolution in Clere and Brooke fo that, when Juftice Manwoode argues rightly from the fon, the doctrine is reprehenfible, whereas whereas no fcruple is made in tracing from the father, to admit the fame arguments., "To pursue the propofed plan of defence, we' fhould continue to examine whether fuch inference follows, as is fuggefted from the ftating of the cafe refolved. But we are prevented by the express prohibition of our author; who, perhaps not thinking he fhould ever adopt a contrary opinion, hath in effect told the student that, if any cafe be put except as from John Stiles, he fhould not admit it. The words are-" The student should bear in mind that, during 2 Com. 240. "this whole procefs, John Stiles is fuppofed to have "been last actually feifed of the eftate: for, if ever "it comes to veft in any other person as heir to John "Stiles, a new order of fucceffion must be observed ❝ upon the death of fuch heir; fince he, by his own "feifin, now becomes an ancestor or ftipes, and must ❝ be put in the place of John Stiles." "Had we previously attended to this admonition, we should have found, that our arguments against the appointment of George Stiles the father, as the ftipes, were needlefs: for, in fuch cafe, a new order of fucceffion must be obferved, and the ftudent is forewarned accordingly. Can we, therefore, with any propriety pursue our enquiries refpecting the inference, when we are forbidden to admit the propofition? "Upon the whole, we prefume to have fhewn that, of the foregoing reasons, the first, fecond, and third, are merely speculative; the fourth is drawn from an inapplicable inapplicable medium, and a charge which is contradicted by the exprefs words of Plowden; the fifth depends upon a distorted authority, and violent af fumption; the fixth on a mifquotation; that the feventh involves a contradiction between the table and the text; and of the eighth it will not be deemed intemperate to say, that it collects a point of doctrine from authorities by which that doctrine is opposed, which point is applied to a case we are directed not to allow; and from which an inference is drawn, though we are enjoined not to admit of the premises." TITLE XXIX. DESCENT. CHAP. IV. Of the Defcent of Eftates in Remainder and Reverfion. § 2. Remainders, &c. defcend to | § 6. A Right to a Remainder does not the Heirs of the Per fon in whom they first vefted. exclude the Half-Blood. 15. An Ad of Ownership operates as a Seifin. Section 1. THE rules laid down in the preceding chapters respecting the descent of estates in poffeffion, do not apply to the defcent of eftates in remainder and reverfion, expectant on an estate of freehold; because, where there is a preceding eftate of freehold, the actual feifin is in the poffeffor of that estate, and not in the perfon entitled to the estate in remainder or reverfion. § 2. It follows, from this principle, that, where a person entitled to an estate in remainder or reverfion, expectant upon a freehold, dies during the continuance of the particular eftate, the remainder or reverfion does not defcend to his heir; because he never had a feifin to render him the ftock or terminus of an inheritance: but it will defcend to the perfon who is heir to the first purchaser of such remainder or reverfion, at the time when it comes into poffeffion. Remainders, to the Heirs of the Perfon in whom they firft vefted. &c. defcend 3 Rep. 42 a. Vide Tit. 17. L. 24. Jenkins v. 2 Will. R.45. S 3. Thus, it was laid down by the Judges in Rattliffe's cafe, that "of a reverfion or a remainder ex"pectant on an estate for life or in tail, there, he who "claims the reverfion as heir, ought to make himself " heir to him who made the gift, or leafe, if the re"verfion or remainder defcend from him. Or, if a "man purchase fuch reverfion or remainder, he who "claims as heir ought to make himself heir to the first "purchaser." § 4. In the cafe of Kellow v. Rowden, it was held by all the Judges, that, where an estate for life or in tail is created, and the reversion in fee expectant there. on defcends from the donor or fettler, through feveral intermediate heirs, before it falls into poffeffion, every person claiming it by defcent muft make himself heir to the donor or settler, and take it as fuch, and not as heir to the intermediate heirs; who need not be fo much as named in an action brought against the perfon fo acquiring the poffeffion, as heir to the donor or fettler for the intermediate heirs never had fuch a feifin as to transmit the reversion from them by descent to any person who was not heir to the donor or fettler. § 5. David Smith, in confideration of his marriage with Sarah Madey in 1716, fettled the premises in question to the use of himself and the faid Sarah during their natural lives, and the life of the furvivor of them; remainder to the heirs of the body of the faid Sarah by the faid David; remainder to the faid David, his heirs and affigns for ever. There |