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.)

In Kent, all men are free and may give or sell their lands
without permission of their lords, as before the Conquest.
(Since Kent was nearest the continent, money flowed between
England and the continent through Kent. So Kent never
developed a manorial system of land holding, but evolved
from a system of clans and independent villages directly
into a commercial system.

Anyone disseising another whereby he also robs him or uses
force and arms in the disseisin shall be imprisoned and
fined.