entered on the land. Once in possession, B could acquire the freehold by a simple deed—a release—from the owner of the reversion. So, in the case above quoted. A, the day after the sale for one year to B, could grant his remaining interest by release to B, who now held the land by virtue of the very Statute of Uses! This method became very popular, freehold lands were transferred by it until 1841. So secret conveyances were actually re-established, instead of being done away.
The disposal of interest in lands had become so popular, and the opposition to its restriction was so strong, that four years after the Statute of Uses power was given to every tenant in fee-simple to dispose by will of all lands held in soccage, and of two-thirds of that held by knight-service. But in the case of soccage lands, primer seizins, reliefs, and fines were to be retained and over the third part of knight-service lands, the right of wardship, in favour of the King or lord.
By this time the Court of Chancery, which at first professed to exercise that higher kind of justice called equity, was simply complicating land-conveyance, and multiplying the chances of a lawsuit arising out of any transfer of land. The "glorious uncertainty of the law" means the uncertainty of the law of Chancery.
CHAPTER X.—THE TAKING OF THE ABBEY LANDS
I HAVE shown that ever since the deposition of Richard II. circumstances had been favouring absolute government. These circumstances bore their full harvest in the reign of Henry VIII.
The resumption of the Church lands by Henry VIII. produced a total change in the land system—a change all the greater because it was more social than legal. About a fourth part of the lands of England actually changed hands; but this very inadequately describes what was done. And as it has ever since been the interest of the well-to-do classes to justify a resumption which enriched them-
