Page:Harvard Law Review Volume 10.djvu/109

83 A BRIEF SURVEY OF EQUITY JURISDICTION. 83 reserving a reiit,^ could couple with the grant or the reservation of the rent a grant or reservation of the right, in case of failure to pay the rent, to enter upon the land, and retain possession of it until, by receipt of the rents and profits, all arrears of the rent were paid ; and, by virtue of this right, the grantee of the rent, or the grantor of the land, or the assignee of either, could recover possession of the land by ejectment. Moreover, as such a right did not operate by way of forfeiture, of course a court of equity would not interfere with its exercise. If, however, the right granted or reserved was to enter upon the land, and take the rents and profits thereof to his own use, until all arrears of rent were paid by the grantor of the rent or the grantee of the land, the right would operate by way of forfeiture, — not indeed of the land, but of its rents and profits be- tween the time of entry and the time of payment of the arrears of rent; and hence equity would relieve against the forfeiture.^ Such was understood by Littleton to be the nature of the right in the case put by him in section 327 of his Tenures.^ It may be added that, at common law, an assignee of a rent, whether it were a rent created by reservation or by grant, was not entitled to any of the foregoing remedies, until the tenant or owner of the land had attorned to him. The necessity of attornment was, however, long since abolished. Of the seven remedies enumerated above, the first and second, as has been seen, no longer exist; the third and fourth are merely personal remedies, — not remedies against the land, — and for that reason alone are entirely inadequate, being of little value except against a solvent defendant; the fifth is a remedy, not against the land bound for the rent, but against movable property found on the land ; the sixth is a remedy against the land, not by way of obtaining payment of the rent, but by way of forfeiture for its non- 1 " Where a feoffment is made of certain lands, reserving a certain rent, etc., upon such condition, that, if the rent be behind, it shall be lawful for the feoffor and his heirs to enter, and to hold the land until he be satisfied or paid the rent behind, etc., in this case, if the rent be behind, and the feoffor and his heirs enter, the feoffee is not alto- geth-r excluded from this, but the feoffor shall have and hold the land, and thereof take the profits, until he be satisfied of the rent behind ; and when he is satisfied, then may the feoffee re-enter into the same land, and hold it as he held it before. For in this case, the feoffor shall have the land — but in manner as for a distress, until he be satis- fied of the rent, etc., though he take the profits in the mean time to his own use," etc. Litt., s. 327. " The case of Littleton cannot be maintained by reason, but only by the authority of the author." Per Kelyng, J., in Jemott v. Cowley, T. Raym. 136. 2 Co. Litt. 203, and Butler's note.
 * Supra, note i.