At first the court of chancery regarded a use as in the nature of a purely personal confidence in the feoffee to uses, so that, on his death, it could not be enforced against his heir, but subsequently, probably about the middle of the fifteenth century, this rule was changed, and the heir was held to take the lands subject to the same uses as existed during his ancestor's life.22 A person to whom the feoffee convoyed the land, if he had notice of the use, likewise took the land subject thereto, and the rule was the same when he had no notice, if he paid no consideration for the conveyance. But if he paid a valuable consideration, and was without notice of the use, he took the land free therefrom.23

19. Sugden's Gilbert, Uses, c. 1, Sec.Sec. 5, 6; 1 Sanders, Uses & Trusts, 60; 1 Cruise's Dig. tit. 11, c. 4, Sec. 18 et seq.

20. Sugden's Gilbert, Uses, 89;

1 Sanders, Uses & Trusts, 59.

21. Sugden's Gilbert, Uses, 94;

2 Sanders, Uses & Trusts 56 et seq; Williams, Real Prop. 172.

22. Bacon, Stat. Uses, 23; Digby

Sec. 99]

Equitable Ownership.

Persons who obtained seisin of the land otherwise than by descent from the original feoffee or by contract with him, claiming by paramount title, or, as it was usually expressed, coming in in the post and not in the per, were not bound by the use, and so a disseisor, or the lord who entered on an escheat or forfeiture, or the feoffee's widow or widower claiming dower or curtesy, was not bound by the use.24