Page:William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England (3rd ed, 1768, vol II).djvu/276

 260 executors, but, in cae the tenant dies intetate, in the adminitrators alo; and go in a coure of ditribution like a chattel interet.

thee two tatutes the title of common occupancy is utterly extinct and abolihed: though that of pecial occupancy, by the heir at law, continues to this day; uch heir being held to ucceed to the ancetor's etate, not by decent, for then he mut take an etate of inheritance, but as an occupant, pecially marked out and appointed by the original grant. The doctrine of common occupancy may however be uefully remembered on the following account, among others: that, as by the common law no occupancy could be of incorporeal hereditaments, as of rents, tithes, advowons, commons, or the like, (becaue, with repect to them, there could be no actual entry made, or corporal eiin had; and therefore by the death of the grantee pur auter vie a grant of uch hereditaments was entirely determined ) o now, I apprehend, notwithtanding thee tatutes, uch grant would be determined likewie; and the hereditaments would not be deviable, nor vet in the executors, nor go in a coure of ditribution. For the tatutes mut not be contrued o as to create any new etate, or to keep that alive which by the common law was determined, and thereby to defer the grantor's reverion; but merely to dipoe of an interet in being, to which by law there was no owner, and which therefore was left open to the firt occupant. When there is a reidue left, the tatutes give it to the executors, &c, intead of the firt occupant; but they will not create a reidue, on purpoe to give it the executors. They only meant to provide an appointed intead of a caual, a certain intead of an uncertain, owner, of lands which before were nobody's; and thereby to upply this caus omius, and render the dipoition of law in all repects entirely uniform: this being the only intance wherein a title to a real etate could ever be acquired by occupancy. Rh