This section is from the book "The Law Of Real Property and Other Interests In Land", by Herbert Thorn Dike Tiffany. Also available from Amazon: A Treatise on the Modern Law of Real Property and Other Interests in Land .
2. Co. Litt. 141b.
The statement that rent is a profit, or a part of the profits, issuing out of the land, does not mean that part of the actual products of the soil must be delivered as rent. Bent is, in fact, usually reserved or made payable in money, but the tribute to be rendered may, by the terms of the reservation, take almost any form, as, for instance, the delivery of a horse,7 or of a certain amount of grain or cotton,8 the furnishing of board or
3. 2 Blackst. Comm. 41.
4. See 2 Pollock & Maitland, Hist. Eng. Law, 126, 129.
5. See Clun's Case, 10 Co. 126b and Post, Sec. 413, notes 93 et seq.
6. Litt., Sec. 513; Co. Litt. 292b; Bordman v. Osborn, 23 Pick. (Mass.) 295; Thorp v. Preston, 42 Mich. 511, 4 N. W. 227; Ord-way v. Remington, 12 R. I. 319, 34 Am. Rep. 646; Haffey v. Miller, 6 Gratt. (Va.) 454.
Consequently a claim for rent subsequently to accrue cannot be presented as a claim against a bankrupt's estate. Atkins v. Wilcox, 105 Fed. 595; Ex parte
Houghton, 1 Lowell, 554, Fed. Cas. No. 6,725; Wilson v. Pennsylvania Trust Co., 114 Fed. 742. But that rent to become due constitutes a present debt, see Ro-well v .Felker, 54 Vt. 526. And see also Brown v. Cairns, 107 Iowa, 277, 77 N. W. 478.
7. Co. Litt. 142a.
8. Co. Litt. 142a; Townsend v. Isenberger, 45 Icwa, 670; Boyd v. Mccombs, 4 Pa. St. 146; Mc-dougal v. Sanders, 75 Ga. 140. Frequently, in this country, rent consists of a named portion of the crop raised. See ante, Sec. 265.
It is said by Coke that "a man upon his feoffment or conveyance cannot reserve to him parcel of the annual profits themselves, as to reserve the vesture or herbage of the land or the like. For a reservation ought not to be a reservation of the profits themselves, since these are granted, but of a new return out of the profits;"11 and his statement in this regard has been followed by other English writers.12 A like view has been strongly asserted in a New Hampshire decision.13 And so it has been said that when the grantor or lessor undertakes to reserve as rent a share of the ore which may be removed from the land, this constitutes properly, not a reservation of rent, but an exception of a part of the property granted or leased.14 But whatever the rule may be in this regard in England, it is not open to question, in most parts of this country, that a reservation as rent of part of the crops to be produced on the land is perfectly valid.