Odger's English Common Law

82 CUSTOMS.
back customs of this class to the reign of Bichard I.
Common usage in the neighbourhood is sufficient." 1
A custom that a tenant shall have the way-going crop after the expiration
of his term is reasonable and good. " It is just, for he who sows ought to
reap ; and it is for the benefit and encouragement of agriculture. It is,
indeed, against the general rule of law concerning emblements, which are
mot allowed to tenants who know when their term is to cease, because it is
held to be their fault or folly to have sown when they knew their interest
would expire before they could reap. But the custom of a particular place
may rectify what otherwise would be imprudence or folly." 2
Again, a custom that a tenant, who is bound to use a farm in a good and
tenantable manner, shall be at liberty, on quitting the farm, to charge
his landlord with a portion of the expenses of draining land which requires
draining, is not unreasonable, though the drainage be done without his
landlord's knowledge or consent. 3
But primd facie the landlord is the person liable to the outgoing tenant
for seed, tillage and so forth, properly bestowed by him upon a farm, and
an alleged custom or usage that the outgoing tenant shall look to the
incoming tenant for payment to the exclusion of the landlord's liability is
unreasonable, uncertain and prejudicial to the interests both of landlords
and of tenants. 4
I. (c). Customs of a Manor.
In early times under the feudal system, when the King
granted to a subject a tract of land of any considerable size,
he usually granted him at the same time certain rights and
jurisdiction over those who lived upon it. In such a case the
territory granted was called a " manor," and the grantee
became " lord of the manor." He had, prior to 1290, 6 power
to grant portions of the land to freehold tenants, who held
them under him as their over-lord in return for certain
services, which were fixed and certain — generally of
a military nature. Indeed a manor -was held not to be
properly constituted unless there were at least two freehold
1 Per Chitty, J., in Daehwood v. Magmao, [1891] 3 Oh. at p. 324 1; see also Dolby
v. Hirst (1819), 1 B. & B. 224 ; Legh v. Hewitt (1803), 4 East, 154 : Tucker v.
Linger (1883), 8 App. Cas. 508.
2 Per Lord Mansfield in Wigglesworthy. Dallison (1779),
at p. 619.
1 Sm. L. C, ]2th ed.
s Mousley v. Ludlam (1851), 21 L. J. Q. B. 64.
' Bradburn v. Foley (1878), 3 O.'P. D. 129, 135.
6 In this year was passed the statute of Quia Emptores (18 Edw. I.
put a stop to all further " subinfeudation."
c. 1), which