by a new grant without1 livery, change [the possessor's] causa possidendi, as was  said above,2 as where, having first granted a usufruct for a term he may grant his  tenant a free tenement, without livery, by force of a new causa. If at first [it was]  for a term of life and as a free tenement, he may change the causa to one in fee,3 but  it would be completely worthless if he transferred the same thing a second time by  the same causa, since by the first transfer he completely ceased to possess.[If one is in  possession of a thing, his own or another's, and it is claimed against him, he may  acknowledge it to be the right of the demandant and remit it completely, to hold of  himself and his heirs, or of another,4 as is explained below [in the portion on] final  concords.]56One may cease to possess and the other begin by his own act or by  another's.7 And by lapse of time as well as animo and corpore:8[as below [in the  portion on] the assise,]9 by lapse of time, as where, when one is present, by negligence;  if absent, by forgetfulness. A long absence, as ten years or longer, brings about  forgetfulness.10
In what ways possession may be lost.
 When possession has once been acquired it may be lost in many ways. Let us see,  therefore, in what ways it may be lost. It is clear that it may be lost by the same  means by which it is acquired. Acquired neither corpore only nor animo only but  by both (though it may be retained animo without corpore) it cannot be lost without  both, that is animo and corpore, for it is retained animo without corpore and corpore  without animo and [only] when both fail is it wholly lost.11 How it may be restored  when lost without the possessor's consent will be adequately explained below [in  the portion on] the assise of novel disseisin.12
Whether he to whom a thing is given may give the thing given to another.13
 We must see whether he to whom a thing has been given may give the thing  over without prejudice to the chief lords. It seems clear that he may, for if he  makes a gift over, though the chief lord suffers damage thereby no wrong is done  him, for not every damage supposes injuria, but conversely, every injuria damage.  [An injuria may be said to be anything wrongfully done,14 and from such an  action arises for remedying the wrong, that which was wrongfully done, but where  there is damnum absque injuria no action arises for remedying the harmful act by  which the damage is caused]. It would be otherwise if15 one could say that when the  donee gives the thing over to others