My reference to leasing copyhold referred to a lease BY the copyholder. I
have seen this used as a means of creating a settlement in several local
manors, providing an alternative means of disposing of the property, though
only for a limited term.
Lords sometimes succeeded in turning copyholds for life into leasehold (held
from the lord), presumably by refusing to add lives to the copyhold.
Peter King
49, Stourbridge Road,
Hagley,
Stourbridge
West Midlands
DY9 0QS
01562-720368
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: From: Local-History list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Frank Sharman
Sent: 26 April 2007 19:46
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [LOCAL-HISTORY] Customary tenant, copyholder, leaseholder.
Peter King's observations are, as ever, accurate and to the point. Perhaps
one issue remains and that is that normally copyhold land in a manor would,
I think, be distinct from leasehold land within that manor. So the two
sorts of lists which Frank Clements has can be treated as quite different
forms of landholding - and the same piece of land ought not to appear in
both. But, of course, one person might hold both copyhold land and
leasehold land in the same manor.
Whether or not a copyholder could create a lease of his copyhold land
would, I think, depend on the custom of the individual manor but I can
think of no reason why there should not be such a custom. But a copyholder
could certainly not turn his own holding into a leasehold by his own
unilateral action. If for some reason he got it into his head that he
would like to make such a conversion he could do it by surrendering it to
the lord of the manor, agreeing with the Lord of the Manor that he would
then be granted a lease.
(I say "he". That would be the usual case but I think there is no reason
why women should not hold copyhold land).
Frank Sharman
Wolverhampton
01902 763246
|