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

an exception to the general lule, which permitted subinfeudations by all lords except the tenants in capite. But I think that as well since, as before, the statute, the King could license his immediate tenant to alien to hold of himself the tenant."

After citing and quoting several authorities to this effect he continues, " Assuming the law to be as in these authorities stated, and assuming further that the grant of a manor and the right to hold manor courts ex vi termini implied an authority in the patentees to create manor tenants by means of grants reserving services to themselves, it still seems clear that the patents {the manor grants) were no violation of the statute referred to. The patent so construed was itself a license to the patentee to make grants to hold of himself. On the making of such grants the patentees became the mesne lords, holding ofthe King, and the grantees of the patentees were the tenants paravail ( so called because ihey have the avails or prnjits of the land), holding by license from the King as lord paramount, of their immediate lords the patentees. The statute would prevent any further subinfeudations, by the freeholders holding under the patentees, unless, indeed, the King and patentees should both consent.