of theſe ſubſequent conditions by the failure of theſe contingencies; by the grantee's not continuing tenant of the manor of Dale, by not having heirs of his body, or by not continuing ſole; the eſtates which were reſpectively veſted in each grantee are wholly determined and void.
A distinction is however made between a condition in deed and a limitation, which Littleton[1] denominates alſo a condition in law. For when an eſtate is ſo expreſſly confined and limited by the words of it's creation, that it cannot endure for any longer time than till the contingency happens upon which the eſtate is to fail, this is denominated a limitation: as when land is granted to a man, ſo long as he is parſon of Dale, or while he continues unmarried, or until out of the rents and profits he ſhall have made 500𝑙. and the like[2]. In ſuch caſes the eſtate determines as ſoon as the contingency happens, (when he ceaſes to be parſon, marries a wiſe, or has received the 500𝑙.) and the next ſubſequent eſtate, which depends upon ſuch determination, becomes immediately veſted, without any act to be done by him who is next in expectancy. But when an eſtate is, ſtrictly ſpeaking, upon condition in deed (as if granted expreſſly upon condition to be void upon the payment of 40𝑙. by the grantor, or ſo that the grantee continues unmarried, or provided he goes to York, &c.[3]) the law permits it to endure beyond the time when ſuch contingency happens, unlefs the grantor or his heirs or aſſigns take advantage of the breach of the condition, and make either an entry or a claim in order to avoid the eſtate[4]. But, though ſtrict words of condition be uſed in the creation of the eſtate, yet if on breach of the condition the eſtate be limited over to a third perſon, and does not immediately revert to the grantor or his repreſentatives, (as if an eſtate be granted by A to B, on condition that within two years B intermarry with C, and on failure thereof then to D and his heirs) this the law conſtrues to be a limitation
