Aid to make one's son a knight or marry off his daughter of a whole knight's fee shall be taken 20s., and 400s. [yearly income from] land held in socage 20s. [5%], and of more, more; and of less, less; after the rate. And none shall levy such aid to make his son a knight until his son is 15 years old, nor to marry his daughter until she is seven year old.
A conveyance of land which is the inheritance of a minor child by his guardian or lord to another is void.
Dower shall not abate because the widow has received dower of another man unless part of the first dower received was of the same tenant and in the same town. But a woman who leaves her husband for another man is barred from dower.
A tenant for a term of years who has let land from a landlord shall not let it lie waste, nor shall a landlord attempt to oust a tenant for a term of years by fictitious recoveries.
When two or more hold wood, turfland, or fishing or other such thing in common, wherein none knows his several, and one does waste against the minds of the others, he may be sued.
Lands which are given to a man and his wife upon condition that if they die without heirs, the land shall revert to the donor or his heir, may not be alienated to defeat this condition.
If a man takes land in marriage with a wife, and she dies before him, the land will revert to the donor or his heir, unless the couple has a child, in which case the husband will have the land by the courtesy of the nation for his life before it reverts to the donor or his heir.
The ecclesiastical law had a doctrine for women-covert, i.e. women under the protection or coverture of a husband. It held that chattels of a woman who married vested in her husband, but he could not dispose of them by will. Her jewelry, but not her apparel, could go to his creditors if his assets didn't cover his debts. If she was a merchant when she married, she could still sell her goods in the open market. The husband also had the right to the rents and profits from his wife's real estate, but not the real estate itself, unless by the birth of a child he became tenant for life by courtesy. Only the father, but not the mother had authority over their children. A father had a right to his child's services, and could sue a third party for abducting, enticing away, or injuring the child, just as he could for his servants. A husband was liable for the debts of his wife, even if incurred before the marriage. He was answerable for her torts and trespasses, except for battery. For this reason, he was allowed to chastise her, restrain her liberty for gross misbehavior, and punish her by beating for some misdemeanors. But the courts would protect her from death, serious bodily harm, or his failure to supply her the necessities of life. Promises under oath were not recognized for married women. A conveyance or agreement of a married woman was void. These principles held only if she was under the protection of her husband, i.e. a woman-covert, and not if they lived separately, for instance if he went to sea. If separated, she had a right to alimony from him to maintain herself.
A free tenant may alienate his land freely, but if the alienation was for an estate in fee simple [to a man and his heirs], the person acquiring the land would hold of the land's lord and not of the person alienating the land. (This halted the growth of subinfeudation and caused services as well as incidents of aids, relief, escheat, wardship, and marriage to go directly to the Chief Lord. It also advantaged the Crown as overlord, which then acquired more direct tenants.)
One may create an estate which will descend in unbroken succession down the line of inheritance prescribed in the original gift as long as that line should last, instead of descending to all heirs. This was called a fee simple conditional holding of land. The successive occupants might draw the rents and cut the wood, but on the death of each, his heir would take possession of an unencumbered interest, unfettered by any liability for the debt of his ancestor or by any disposition made by him during his lifetime e.g. a wife's estate in dower or a husband's estate in courtesy. If there was no issue, it reverted to the original donor. (This curtailed the advantage of tenants of the greater barons who profited by increased wardships and reliefs from subinfeudation from subdivision and better cultivation of their land while still paying the greater barons fixed sums. This statute that protected reversionary estates incidentally established a system of entails. This new manner of holding land: "fee tail", is in addition to the concepts of land held in fee simple (i.e. with no subdivisions) and land held for life. No grantee or his heirs could alienate the land held in fee tail. The donor could give directions that the land could remain to another person rather than reverting to himself. (Interests in remainder or reversion of estates in land replace the lord's tenurial right to succeed to land by escheat if his tenant dies without heirs.)