or special. A power is general, when it authorizes an alienation in fee to any alienee whatever. A power is special, when the person, or class of persons, is designated, or where the power authorizes the alienation of a particular estate less than a fee. A power is beneficial, when no other person than the grantee of the power has any interest in its execution. Where an absolute power of alienation, not accompanied by any trust, is given, such estate is changed into a fee.

2. Every power of disposition is deemed absolute, by means of which the grantee is enabled in his lifetime to dispose of the entire fee for his own benefit. A general power is in trust, when any person, or class of persons, other than the grantee of such power, is designated as entitled to the proceeds to result from the alienation of the lands according to the power. A special power is in trust, when the disposition which it authorizes is limited to be made to any person other than the grantee of such power, or is entitled to any benefit from the disposition authorized by such power.

3. Every trust-power, unless its execution or non-execution is made expressly to depend on the will of the grantee, is imperative. A trust-power does not cease to be imperative when the grantee has the right to select one, and exclude others, of the persons designated as the objects of the trust. When a disposition under a power is made to several persons, without specification of the share to be allotted to each, all are entitled to an equal proportion. If the disposition be left to the discretion of the trustee, the trustee may allot the whole to one, to the exclusion of all the others. If such trustee die, leaving

is a power beneficial? When an absolute power of alienation is not accompanied by any trust, what is the effect?

2. When is the power of disposition deemed absolute? When is a general power in trust? When is a special power in trust?

3. When is a trust-power imperative? Is it imperative when the grantee has the right to select one and exclude others? If the distribution be left to the discretion of the trustee, what may he do? If such trustee die, leaving the power unexecuted?

the power unexecuted, the power must be executed for the benefit of all.

4. When the power is created by will, and the testator does not designate by whom it is to be executed, the court will appoint a trustee to execute the power. Any person interested in the objects of such trust may compel its execution.

5. If the power is vested in several persons, all must unite in the execution. If one die, the power may be executed by the survivors. If the power is confined to the disposition by grant, it cannot be executed by will. If the grantor of a power require formalities in the execution not required by law, such additional formalities will not be necessary to a valid execution of the power.

6. The intention of the grantor must be followed as to the mode, time, and condition of its execution. When the consent of a third person is required, such consent must be expressed in the instrument by which the power is executed, or must be certified in writing thereon. Instruments executing a power are effected by fraud, in the same manner as conveyances. If the execution of a power be defective, in whole or in part, its proper execution may be decreed in equity.

4. When the power is created by will, and the testator does not designate by whom it is to be executed? Who may compel the execution of a trust-power?

5. If the trust-power is vested in several persons, who must join in the execution? If one die, how is the power to be executed? If the power authorize the disposal of the estate by deed, can it be done by will? If the power be executed by a married woman, how is it to be acknowledged? If the grantor of a power require formalities not required by law?

6. As to what, must the intentions of the grantor be followed? When the consent of a third party is required, how must such consent appear? If the instrument executing a power be effected by fraud? If the execution of the power be defective?

CHAPTER LI

REAL PROPERTY.

1. ALL estates in lands, in fee or for life, are real property. All other estates in lands, such as leases for years, are personal property. All other property, not included in real property, is personal property. An estate in fee is an estate in which the owner has the entire property, as the term is used in this country. The people of the State, in their right of sovereignty, are deemed to possess the original title to all lands within the jurisdiction of the State. Upon failure of heirs, the title reverts or escheats to the people of the State. It reverts to the State subject to all mortgages and encumbrances, by judgment or otherwise, in the same condition that it would descend to heirs.

2. Lands in the several States are declared to be allodial; the entire and absolute property is vested in the owner. By the law of England, the king is the supreme" proprietor of all the lands in the kingdom. There is no proprietor of land, except the king, who is not a tenant. The feudal system had its origin in the military policy of the northern nations, who poured themselves in vast numbers into all parts of Europe at the decline of the Roman empire. Large districts of land were allotted by the conquering generals to the superior officers of the army.

1. What property is real? What property is personal? What is an estate in fee? Who are deemed to possess the original and ultimate title to all lands within the State? Upon failure of heirs, to whom does the title revert? Subject to what?

2. What are lands in the several States declared to be? What is the meaning of allodial? Who is the supreme proprietor of all the lands in England? What are all others holding lands? In what did the feudal system have its origin? What was allotted by the conquering generals? To whom? How dealt out by them? What were these allotments called? What do these words signify in the northern language? What

These were dealt out again in smaller parcels to the inferior officers and most deserving soldiers. These allotments were called fada, feuds, fiefs, or fees. In the northern language, these words signify a constitutional reward. The condition annexed to the reward was that they should faithfully serve, in war, the person by whom. they were given. The tenant took the oath of fealty, and upon breach of the condition annexed to the reward and of the oath, the lands again reverted to him who granted them.

3. All grantors, as well as receivers, were mutually bound to defend each other's possessions. Every receiver of lands was bound, when called upon by his benefactor, to do all in his power to defend him. Such benefactor was under the immediate command of his superior; and so upward to the supreme general or the prince. The several lords were reciprocally bound, in their respective gradations, to protect the possessions they had given. The effect of this constitution was soon apparent in the strength and spirit with which they maintained their conquests. Scarcely had the northern conquerors established themselves in their new dominions, when the wisdom of their constitution, as well as their personal valor, alarmed all the princes of Europe in those countries which had been formerly Roman provinces, but had deserted their old masters in the general wreck of the empire.

4. The property of those countries was held by a title wholly independent of any superior, and perfectly allodial. But those princes now parcelled out their royal territories, and persuaded their subjects to surrender their landed

was the condition annexed to the reward? What oath did the tenant take? What was the effect of a breach of the conditions annexed to the reward, and of the violation of the oath of fealty?

3. To what were all grantors and receivers bound? To what was the receiver of lands bound? Under whose command was such benefactor? What were the several lords reciprocally bound to do? In what did the effect of this constitution appear? What effect did their success have upon the other princes of Europe?

4. By what title had the lands in these countries been held? What did these princes do? How far did the feudal constitution extend?

property, and retake the same under the feudal obligations of military fealty. In a few years the feudal constitution extended itself over all Western Europe. The Roman laws, which had so universally prevailed, were driven out, and for many centuries became lost and forgotten. The feudal system was adopted in England as a part of the national constitution during the reign of William the Norman. In consequence of this change, the king became the universal lord, and original proprietor of all the lands in the kingdom.

5. The grantor of the feud was called the proprietor, or lord, because he retained the ultimate property of the feud, or reward. The grantee, who had the use and possession, was styled the feudatory, or vassal, which is another name for tenant, or holder of the lands. The words of the grant were words of gratuitous and pure donation. The grant was perfected by the ceremony of corporeal investiture, or open and notorious delivery of possession in the presence of other vassals. The tenant, upon investiture, did homage to his lord. Openly and humbly kneeling, being ungirt and uncovered, and holding up his hands both together between those of the lord, who sat before him, he professed that "he did become his man from that day forth, of life, and limb, and earthly honor;" and then he received a kiss from his lord. The idea of tenure pervades to a considerable degree the laws of real property in the several States. The title to lands in this country is essentially allodial, and every tenant in feesimple has an absolute title, yet, in technical language, he is called a tenant in fee.

What was the effect upon the Roman laws? When was the feudal system adopted in England? In consequence of this change, what did the king become?

5. What was the grantor of a feud called? Why? What was the grantee called? What was the character of the words of the grant? How was the grant perfected? What did the tenant do upon investiture? What position did he assume? What did he profess? What did he receive from his lord? What does the idea of tenure pervade? What is the nature of the title to lands in this country? What has every tenant in fee?