ſeiſed, was really feudum antiquum, or one deſcended to him from his anceſtors, the father could not poſſibly ſucceed to it, becauſe it muſt have paſſed him in the courſe of deſcent, before it could come to the ſon; unleſs it were feudum maternum, or one deſcended from his mother, and then for other reaſons (which will appear hereafter) the father could in no wife inherit it. And if it were feudum novum, or one newly acquired by the ſon, then only the deſcendants from the body of the feudatory himſelf could ſucceed, by the known maxim of the early feodal conſtitutions[1]; which was founded as well upon the perſonal merit of the vaſal, which might be tranſmitted to his children but could not aſcend to his progenitors, as alſo upon this conſideration of military policy, that the decrepit grandſire of a vigorous vaſal would be but indifferently qualified to ſucceed him in his feodal ſervices. Nay, even if this feudum novum were held by the ſon ut feudum antiquum, or with all the qualities annexed of a feud deſcended from his anceſtors, ſuch feud muſt in all reſpects have deſcended as if it had been really an antient feud; and therefore could not go to the father, becauſe, if it had been an antient feud, the father muſt have been dead before it could have come to the ſon. Thus whether the feud was ſtrictly novum, or ſtrictly antiquum, or whether is was novum held ut antiquum, in none of theſe caſes the father could poſſibly ſucceed. Theſe reaſons, drawn from the hiſtory of the rule itſelf, ſeem to be more ſatisfactory than that quaint one of Bracton[2], adopted by ſir Edward Coke[3], which regulates the deſcent of lands according to the laws of gravitation.
II. A second general rule or canon is, that the male iſſue ſhall be admitted before the female.
