mination "loom" is of Saxon original, in which language it signifies a limb or member: so that heir-loom is nothing else but a limb or member of the inheritance (s). An heirloom is also called "principalium," a chief or principal, and "hæreditarium" (t). what they are strictly: Brooke says (u), that heir-looms are those things which have continually gone with the capital messuage, by custom, which is the best thing of every sort, as of beds, tables, pots, pans, and such like of dead chattels moveable. And Lord Coke says (x), that heir-looms are due by custom and not by the common law, and that the heir may have an action for them at common law, and shall not sue for them in the Ecclesiastical Court. Also in Spelman's Glossary (y), an heir-loom is defined to be "omne utensile robustius quod ab ædibus non facile revellitur, ideoque ex more quorundam locorum ad hæredem transit tanquam membrum hæreditatis." And in Les Termes de la Ley (2), (a book of great antiquity and accuracy) (a), an heir-loom is described to be "any piece of household stuff (ascun parcel des utensils d'un mease,) which, by the custom of some countries, having belonged to a house for certain descents, goes with the house (after the death of the owner) unto the heir and not to the executors." Hence it seems to follow, that an heir-loom, in the strict must go to the heir by cussense of the word, can only go to the heir by force of a custom, and that in it's nature it is a chattel distinct from the freehold. Yet Blackstone (b) says, that heir-looms are "generally such things as cannot be taken away without damaging or dismembering the freehold; " And Lord Holt is reported to have said at Nisi Prius, that goods in gross cannot be an heir-loom, but they must be things fixed to the freehold, as old tables, benches, &c. (c); which proposition is not only adverse to the authorities above cited, with tom: semble, must be of a ponderous nature. Crown jewels. Heir-looms are not devisable to the executors : regard to an heir-loom being a detached chattel, but is also liable to the objection that the heir would not then take it by custom, but as a thing annexed to the freehold at common law. Moreover in the report of Lord Petre v. Heneage, by Lord Raymond (d), Lord Holt merely says, a jewel cannot be an heir-loom, but only things ponderous, as carts, tables, &c." (e), which agrees with the above definition by Spelman, omne utensile robustius." 66 The custom which entitles the heir must be strictly proved (ƒ). The ancient jewels of the Crown are heir-looms, and shall descend to the next successor (g). If a man, says Lord Coke (h), be seised of a house, and possessed of divers heir-looms that, by custom, have gone with the house from heir to heir, and by his Will deviseth away the heir-looms, this devise is void; for Littleton says, "the Will takes effect after his death, and by his death the heir-looms, by ancient custom, are vested in the heir, and the law prefers the custom before the devise." And Lord Coke, in another place, observes, that the ancient jewels of the Crown, being heir-looms, are not devisable by testament (i). So Lord Macclesfield, in Tipping v. Tipping (k), said, “I take it, bona paraphernalia are not devisable by the husband from the wife, any more than heir-looms from the able by the an heir "(). Yet, during his life, the owner may sell or dispose of them, as he may of the timber of the estate (m). but are alien cestor in his lifetime. Chattels in the Besides heir-looms, properly so called, there are other nature of heir- instances of inanimate personal chattels, which the law gives looms : (d) Vol. i. p. 728. (e) And Blackstone, in an earlier (ƒ) 2 Black. Comm. 428. (h) Co. Lit. 185, b. (i) Co. Lit. 18, b. (k) 1 P. Wms. 730. (1) See also to the same effect, 2 Black. Comm. 429. Com. Dig. Biens. (B.) (m) 2 Black. Comm. 429. So the king may dispose of the ancient crown jewels by patent: Lord Hastings v. Sir Archibald Douglas, Cro. Car. 344, by Berkeley and Jones. coat-armour, &c., &c., set of deceased: to the heir, as part of his inheritance, and which may be monuments, considered as chattels in the nature of heir-looms. Thus monuments, coat-armour, the sword, pennons, and other up in honour ensigns of honour, set up in memory of the deceased, shall go to the heir of the deceased, as heir-looms in the manner of an inheritance (n); and it matters not that they are annexed to the freehold, albeit that is in the parson (o). But the pro- coffin and perty of the shroud and coffin remains in the executors or other person who was at the charge of the funeral: and it may be laid to be theirs, in an indictment for stealing them (p). shroud : and garter: So though a testator devise all his jewels, &c., to his Collar of S S. wife, yet his garter and collar of S S. shall go to his heir, in the way of heir-looms (q). So where land is held by the tenure of cornage, an antient horn may go along with the antient horn: inheritance, as an heir-loom (r). In the case of Upton v. Lord Ferrers (s), a question was raised, whether the executor, or the heir-at-law of a peer of Parliament having succeeded to the peerage, was entitled to the Journals of the House of Lords, which are delivered to peers: The Master of the Rolls (Sir R. P. Arden) did not determine the point; but intimated an opinion that the heirat-law was entitled, observing, that a bishop gives a receipt for the journals of his see: and upon the death of a peer, the subsequent volumes only are delivered to the next lord. Charters or deeds relating to the inheritance, are considered so much to savour of the realty, that the law for some purposes does not account them to be chattels (t), but (n) Corven's case, 12 Co. 105. Co. Lit. 18, b. Frances v. Ley, Cro. Jac. 367. May v. Gilbert, 2 Bulstr. 151. 2 Black. Comm. 429. Co. Lit. 18, b. (0) Co. Lit. 18, b. 1 Gibs. Cod. 544. 2 Black. Comm. 429. (p) 2 Russell on Crimes, 163. If the executor lays a grave-stone on the testator in the church, and sets up coat-armour, and the vicar or parson removes them or carries them away, an action on the case (q) Earl of Northumberland's (r) Pusey v. Pusey, 1 Vern. 273. (t) By a grant of omnia bona et Journals of the House of Lords: Charters and deeds belong ing to the inheritance, go to the heir, and not to the executor: so of the box in which they are kept : Chatteis set tled or devised provides, that they shall follow the land to which they relate, and shall vest in the heir, as incident to the estate, to the exclusion of the executor or administrator (u). So far has the doctrine of charters and other written assurances concerning the realty not being chattels been carried, that larceny could not have been committed of them at common law, the taking of them being considered, (as of other things which were part of the freehold,) merely as a trespass and not a felony (x). The very box or chest which has usually been employed for keeping them, partakes of their nature, and goes to the heir, and not to the executor (y); and of that also, at common law, no larceny could have been committed (z). Some writers have taken a difference, that the executor shall have the chest unless it be shut or sealed (a). But the weight of authorities seems against any such distinction, and in favour of the heir's general right (b). But this rule applies to those deeds and writings only which relate to the freehold and inheritance; for such as regard terms for years, goods, chattels, or debts, belong to the executor or administrator (c). Personal property may also be devised or limited in strict as heir-looms: settlement to one for life, with remainder to sons and daughters in tail, so as to be transmissible like heirlooms (d). Thus a testator may devise or limit in strict catalla, charters concerning the (u) Godolph. Pt. 2, c. 14, s. 1. (x) 2 Russell on Crimes, 141. But this defect of the common law has been remedied by stat. 7 & 8 Geo. IV. c. 29, s. 23. (y) Godolph. Pt. 2, c. 14, s. 1. (z) 2 Russell on Crimes, 142. Touchst. 470. 1 Roll. Abr. 915, tit. Exors. (U.) pl. 7. (b) Godolph. Pt. 2, c. 14, s. 1. Wentw. Off. Ex.156. Law Test. 381. (c) Wentw. Off. Ex. 153, 14th edit. Bac. Abr. tit. Exors. (H. 3.) If the writings of an estate are pawned or pledged for money, they are considered as chattels in the hands of the creditor, and in case of his decease, they will go to his personal representatives as the party entitled to the benefit accruing from the loan: Touchst. 469.) (d) Co. Lit. 18, b. note (109), by Hargrave. settlement an estate and capital mansion, together with personal property, as the plate, pictures, library, furniture, &c. therein, such plate, &c. to be enjoyed, together with the house and estate, unalienable by the devisees in succession, so far as the law will allow. But the chattels, whether trustees be interposed or not, will be the absolute property of the first person seised in tail, and on his death devolve on his executors or administrators; and be conformable to all the other rules concerning executory devises, so that the property cannot be rendered unalienable longer than lives in being and twenty-one years afterwards (e). If the chattels, therefore, which are intended to go as heir-looms, are merely subject to the same limitations as the real estate limited in strict settlement, they will vest absolutely in the first tenant in tail, though he should die within an hour after his birth, and will go to his personal representative: Hence as the real estate in that event passes over to the next remainder-man, a separation between. the two properties ensues. It has been a subject of much discussion whether this will be obviated by a mere direction that the chattels shall go together with the land, “for so long a time as the rules of law and equity will permit." But the point, it should seem, must now be considered as settled, that this must be treated as a direct and not as an executory gift, and that, consequently, the absolute interest in the chattels will nevertheless vest in the first tenant in tail (ƒ). And accordingly in the case of Rowland v. Morgan (g), it was ruled by Sir James Wigram, V.C., and afterwards Lord Cottenham, C., on appeal, that a direction annexed to a bequest of chattels, that they shall go as heirlooms, although accompanied by a direction to the executors to make an inventory of them, does not render such (e) Ibid. Carr v. Lord Errol, 14 Ves. 478. (f) Foley v. Burnell, 1 Bro. C. C. 274. Vaughan v. Burslem, 3 Bro. C. C. 101. Duke of Newcastle v. Lincoln, 12 Ves. 218 (overruling Lord Hardwicke's decisions in |