This ſuppoſed recompenſe in value is the reaſon why the iſſue in tail is held to be barred by a common recovery. For, if the recoveree ſhould ever obtain a recompenſe in lands from the common vouchee (which there is a poſſibility in contemplation of law, though a very improbable one, of his doing) theſe lands would ſupply the place of thoſe ſo recovered from him by colluſion, and would deſcend to the iſſue in tail[1]. This reaſon will alſo hold, with equal force, as to moſt remainder-men and reverſioners; to whom the poſſibility will remain and revert, as a full recompenſe for the reality, which they were otherwiſe entitled to: but it will not always hold; and therefore, as Pigott ſays[2], the judges have been even aſtuti, in inventing other reaſons to maintain the authority of recoveries. And, in particular, it hath been ſaid, that, though the eſtate-tail is gone from the recoveree, yet it is not deſtroyed, but only transferred; and ſtill ſubſiſts, and will ever continue to ſubſiſt (by conſtruction of law) in the recoveror, his heirs, and aſſigns: and, as the eſtate-tail ſo continues to ſubſiſt for ever, the remainders or reverſions expectant on the determination of ſuch eſtate-tail can never take place.
To ſuch aukward ſhifts, ſuch ſubtle refinements, and ſuch ſtrange reaſoning, were our anceſtors obliged to have recourſe, in order to get the better of that ſtubborn ſtatute de donis. The deſign, for which theſe contrviances were ſet on foot, was certainly laudable; the unrivetting the fetters of eſtates-tail, which were attended with a legion of miſcheifs to the commonwealth: but, while we applaud the end, we cannot but admire the means. Our modern courts of juſtice have indeed adopted a more manly way of treating the ſubject; by conſidering common recoveries in no other light, than as the formal mode of conveyance, by which tenant in tail is enabled to aliene his lands. But, ſince the ill conſequences of fettered inheritances are now generally ſeen and allowed, and of courſe the utility and expedience of ſetting them at liberty are apparent; it hath often been wiſhed, that the pro-
