(b) Springing uses (p. 299).
(c) Shifting uses (p. 300).
As has already been seen, after the Introduction of uses it be-came possible to create estates in land which could not be raised at common law.107 Before the statute of uses, the owner of land could enfeoff another in fee to hold for the use of the feoffor for life, and after his death to the use of a third person, etc. After the passage of the statute of uses, the legal title in such cases was executed in the beneficiaries,-that is, if the estate was vested,-and contingent estates were executed as soon as they became vested, and in this way legal estates could be created which were impossible before the statute. Although freeholds could not be made to commence in future at common law, future uses were recognized before the statute of uses, and continued to be after its passage.108 In some of the books there is a great deal of discussion as to where the seisin was in case of future uses, but this refinement is now of no value.109
176. Future uses are uses which take effect as remainders.
Uses which take effect as remainders are most properly called future uses, though the term "contingent uses" is often applied
105 1 Stim. Am. St. Law, § 1406.
106 Richardson v. Wheatland, 7 Mete. (Mass.) 169; Moore v. Littel, 41 N. Y. 6G. 107 Ante, p. 254.
108 Welsh v. Foster, 12 Mass. 93; Wyman v. Brown, 50 Me. 139. 109 See Brent's Case, 3 Dyer, 340a; Chudlelgh's Case, 1 Coke, 120.
§ 177) to them. This is incorrect, however, since such uses may take effect as vested remainders as well as contingent.110 Remainders arising under the statute of uses have the same incidents as those at common law.111 A future use must have a preceding particular estate to support it, and must not take effect in derogation of that estate. If these requisites fail, the limitation will take effect as a springing or shifting use.112 Contingent uses may be defeated the same as contingent remainders.113
177. Springing uses are uses which take effect without any-preceding estate to support them.
"A springing use is a use, either vested or contingent, limited to arise without any preceding limitation.114 Springing uses do not defeat a preceding particular estate.115 When there is a limitation of a springing use, there is also a resulting use in fee in the grantor, until the springing use takes effect, so that in reality the springing use operates on the preceding resulting use in the grantor in the same way that a shifting use does upon the particular estate which precedes it.116 An example of a springing use is a limitation to the use of B. and his heirs after the death of A.117 A springing use may be contingent as well as vested.118
110 Adams v. Terre-tenants of Savage, 2 Salk. 679; Davies v. Speed, Id. 675; Southcote v. Stowell, 1 Mod. 238; Cole v. Sewell, 4 Dru. & War. 1; Gore v. Gore, 2 P. Wms. 28.
111 2 Washb. Real Prop. (5th Ed.) 663; Rogers v. Fire Co., 9 Wend. (N. Y.) 611; State v. Trask, 6 Vt. 355. So they cannot be limited after an estate for years. Adams v. Savage, 2 Ld. Raym. 854; Rawley v. Holland, 22 Vin. Abr. 189, pl. 11.
112 Gore v. Gore, 2 P. Wms. 28; Davies v Speed, 2 Salk. 675.
113 See Davies v. Speed, 2 Salk. 675.
114 Cornish, Uses, 91.
115 Mckee v. Marshall (Ky.) 5 S. W. 415. Wyman v. Brown, 50 Me. 139; Egerton v. Brownlow, 4 H. L. Cas. 1, 205.
116 Shapleigh v. Pilsbury, 1 Me. 139; Nicolls v. Sheffield, 2 Brown, Ch. 215.
117 Jackson v. Dunsbach, 1 Johns. Cas. (N. Y.) 92; Mutton's Case, 3 Dyer, 274.
118 Shapleigh v. Pilsbury, 1 Me. 271.
178. Shifting uses are uses which take effect in derogation of a preceding estate.
Shifting uses are also called secondary uses, and are future limitations which cut short a preceding estate;119 for example, a limitation to A. and his heirs, and after B. returns from Rome to C. The estate which C. takes when B. returns from Rome cuts off the preceding estate in A. By means of a shifting use, it is possible to limit a fee after a fee.120