This statute, after reciting that the feudal tenants have sold their lauds to be holden in fee of themselves, instead of the chief lord of the fee, whereby those lords have lost their escheats and other feudal perquisites to their " manifest disinheritance," enacts that " forever hereafter it shall be lawful to every freeman to sell at his own pleasure his lands or tenements, or part thereof, so neverthless that the I'eoftee [_the grantee], shall hold the same lands or tenements of the same chief lord of the fee and by the same services or customs as his feoffor [^grantor], held them before. A second chapter provides for an apportionment of the services in case of a sale of a psa't of the laud out of which they issued. (Coke, 2 Inst. 500.)

" The freedom of alienation thus conferred upon the military tenants, was undoubtedly a very material amelioration of the feudal system, but at the same time the main object of the statute would seem to have been to secure to the great barons their profits arising out of these tenures. It is stated in the statute itself that it was ordained "at the instance of the great men of the realm," and it was clearly for their |)rotection, though incidentally, and probably by its unforeseen operation, proved a relief to the inferior tenants. Ihe evil was that the chief lords were defrauded of the fruits of their tenures, and the remedy provided was, that every tenant, however remote, should remain the debtor of the chief lord instead of his immediate feoffor \_grantor] for the services incident to the tenure. But as one may generally waive an advantage secured to himself, so it was held that the chief lord might forego the benefit of the statute by authorizing his tenant to make a subinfeudation, that is, grant lands to be holdeu of himself; but this could not be done by a mesne {middle) lord on account of the interest of his superiors.