puniſhment for the offence; and does not at all relate to the feodal ſyſtem, nor is the conſequence of any ſigniory or lordſhip paramount[1]: but, being a prerogative veſted in the crown, was neither ſuperſeded nor diminiſhed by the introduction of the Norman tenures; a fruit and conſequence of which eſcheat muſt undoubtedly be reckoned. Eſcheat therefore operates in ſubordination to this more antient and ſuperior law of forfeiture.
The doctrine of eſcheat upon attainder, taken ſingly, is this: that the blood of the tenant, by the commiſſion of any felony, (under which denomination all treaſons were formerly comprized[2]) is corrupted and ſtained, and the original donation of the feud is thereby determined, it being always granted to the vaſal on the implied condition of dum bene ſe geſſerit. Upon the thorough demonſtration of which guilt, by legal attainder, the feodal covenant and mutual bond of fealty are held to be broken, the eſtate inſtantly falls back from the offender to the lord of the fee, and the inheritable quality of his blood is extinguiſhed and blotted out for ever. In this ſituation the law of feodal eſcheat was brought into England at the conqueſt; and in general ſuperadded to the antient law of forfeiture. In conſequence of which corruption and extinction of hereditary blood, the land of all felons would immediately inveſt in the lord, but that the ſuperior law of forfeiture intervenes, and intercepts it in it's paſſage; in caſe of treaſon, forever; in caſe of other felony, for only a year and a day, after which time it goes to the lord in a regular courſe of eſcheat[3], as it would have done to the heir of the felon in caſe the feodal tenures had never been introduced. And that this is the true operation and genuine hiſtory of eſcheats will moſt evidently appear from this incident to gavelkind lands, (which ſeem to be the old Saxon tenure) that they are in no caſe ſubject to eſcheat for felony, though they are liable to forfeiture for treaſon[4].
