-And that it still continues in Kent, and has prevailed there from the earliest establishment of the Anglo-Saxons in Britain ?-Did it not occur to the learned Commentator that the right of primogeniture was merely introduced by the feudists to preserve the fee entire, to the intent that the tenant by knight's service, who by his tenure was to attend the king in his wars, might do it with more dignity and grandeur ?-that, upon the abolition of voyages royal' and the other feodal burthens, this unnatural excrescence ought, upon the legal maxim 'cessante causá cessabit effectus,' to have ceased also ?-And that upon the conversion of the military tenures into free and common socage, the antient right of inheritance and descent should have been restored to the people?

There is no reason why primogeniture-the last remaining badge of our slavery—the last relic of Norman tyranny and usurpation—should be permitted still to press upon the great body of the people. The usual argument advanced in favour of its continuance, since the object of its creation has ceased, is, that it tends to maintain the dignity of the nobility and aristocracy, by preserving their possessions entire. But this is, surely, a very insufficient and unsatisfactory reason for inflicting it upon all the socage lands of England. Nor is it necessary, even for the purpose for which it is kept on foot; for in Kent, where the law of primogeniture is unknown, the care of preserving their possessions entire is left to the nobility and aristocracy, who, by the facilities afforded by marriage settlements, deeds, and wills, are enabled to entail their estates at pleasure.

'Nothing proves more strongly the detestation in which the people of this country held the feudal oppressions, than that the word vasal, which

once signified a feudal tenant or grantee of land, is now synonymous to slave; and that the word villain, which once meant only an innocent, inoffensive bondman, has kept its relative distance, and denotes a person destitute of every moral and honourable principle, and is become one of the most opprobrious terms in the English language." 162

We have now to consider the inroads which the feodal system from time to time made in the free Saxon tenures of Kent, and to what extent it prevailed in this county.

The three great eras of its introduction are

I. The acquisition, by the Norman chieftains, of the forfeited lands of the conquered Saxons, after the battle of Hastings. II. The charter of K. John, to Hubert, archbishop of Canterbury, and his successors, to change the descent of Gavelkind lands. And,

III. The disgavelling statutes in the reigns of Hen. VII and VIII, Edw. VI, Q. Eliz., and Jac. I.

Upon each of which we will offer a few remarks.

And, FIRST, We learn from Domesday Book, title 'Chenth,' the names of the great landholders, or tenants in capite, at the time of that Survey, as follows:

In Domesday Book the king's lands are described under the title of "Terra Regis;" those of the archbishop under that of "Terra Archiep'i Cantuariensis;" those of his men under that of "Terra militum ejus ;" and those of the others under their respective titles.

The king's lands, or terra regis, were of course held jure corona; those of the archbishop, the bishops, and of the religious houses were held in frankalmoigne and in capite; and the rest in capite, by knight's service, or military tenure. These last, I apprehend, are

"The lands, tenements, and fees in Kent, originally holden by antient tenure of knight's service, descendible to the eldest son only, according to the ordinary course of the common law, and not of the nature of Gavelkind, nor departible by order of the custom." 163

But I apprehend that this must be qualified and restricted to the manors and royalties, and to such lands only as were actually held by them (in demesne), and to such other lands as they acquired from their tenants, or feudatories, by escheat or otherwise, as mentioned in this section of the Custumal

"If any tenement of Gavelkind do escheat to any lord, which holdeth by fee of hawberke or by serjeantie, by death or by gavelate, or be to him granted by his tenant, it shall not be partible among the heires males of the lord."

Likewise

"All lands in the county of Kent, which were antiently and originally holden in socage tenure, are of the nature of Gavelkind." 164

I am inclined to think that the term "antient knight's service," imports such lands only as were held by military tenure, or knight's service, before the year 1189 (the first year of K. Ric. I), the date of legal memory; and that

163 Robinson on Gavelkind, p. 57; and Lambard's Peramb. Kent, p. 531.
164 Robinson on Gavelkind, p. 55; and Lambard's Peramb. Kent, p. 531.

"antient socage tenure" implies all the lands in Kent which had not been converted into military tenure prior to A.D.1189. But I leave this very abstruse point to the better judgment of the reader, and proceed to

SECOND-The charter of K. John to the Archbishops of Canterbury. This is a very singular charter, and of great historical interest; we therefore give it in extenso.

This antient power exercised by the king and the archbishop, to change the descent of Gavelkind lands, and to convert them into military tenures, or knights' service, has been variously considered by the courts.

165 Xenia Averagia. See the Glossary-in verb.