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.

... As the King is lord paramount in all feudal tenures, no subject, since the statute, can, by his own authority, create a manor ; and as in Eugland, all the land was granted at, or soon after the Conquest, it follows that English Manors must have their origin prior to (this statute) the eighteenth of Edward first (Anno 1290). But as the King does not hold of any sujieriorj he may grant land to be holden of himself, " for," says Coke, " hereby no man is restrained, but he which holds over of some lord, and the King holds of none" (2 Inst. 67). Therefore, if there are crown lands in England at this day which have never been granted to a subject, they may, without doubt, be erected into royal manors. And cannot the King grant to his immediate tenant the right to make grants to be held of himself, the tenant, since thus there would be the assent of all the lords, mediate and immediate. Tiie King's tenants in capite could not make such grants before the statute quia emptores without his consent. This was by force of the King's prerogative, and was