Skip to main content

Full text of "Somersetshire pleas (civil and criminal), from the rolls of the itinerant justices.."

See other formats 


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 


^omttf^ti  (Recorb  ^ociefg* 


Vol.    XI 


as 


..^  . 


f./3r,"t'.     C\  f  i  d 'T?<»g';s 


(CIVIL   AND    CRIMINAL), 


FROM   THE 


ROLLS  OF  THE  ITINERANT  JUSTICES 

(close   of    I  2X11    century — 41    HENRY    III.) 


EDITED  BY 

CHARLES    E.  H.  CHADWYCK  HEALEY. 
One  of  Her  Majesty s  Counsel, 


PRINTED  FOR  SUBSCRIBERS  ONLY 


1897. 


LONDON: 
HARRIiJON   AND  SONS,  PRINTERS   IN   ORDINARY   TO   HER   MAJESTY, 

ST.  martin's  lank. 

aXANFORD  UNIVERSITY 
LIBRARIES 


OCT  1 8  1966 


^omttBti  (Recorb  ^ocie^g* 


REPORT. 

The  Council  is  glad  to  be  able  to  report  that  the  number  of 
subscribers  has  not  diminished  during  the  past  year.  Ten  have 
ceased  to  belong  to  the  Society,  and  fifteen  new  names  have  been 
inserted  on  our  list  It  must,  however,  be  noticed  that  the  number 
of  regular  subscribers  docs  not  increase.  Names  are  put  down  for 
a  particular  year,  and  disappear  in  the  succeeding  one,  and  con- 
sequently the  funds  are  not  only  very  uncertain,  but  the  plans  of  the 
Council  are  much  hampered  by  its  inability  to  know  the  extent  of 
the  fund  on  which  it  has  to  rely.  The  cost  of  transcription  in  the 
past  has  already  consumed  all  the  resources  of  the  Society,  and  for 
the  future  both  transcription  and  printing  must  be  paid  for  out  of  the 
year's  income.  Unless,  therefore,  there  is  a  considerable  increase  in 
the  number  of  subscribers  it  is  evident  that  the  size  of  the  volumes 
will  have  to  be  reduced  or  the  regularity  of  their  appearance  inter- 
rupted.    For  next  year  a  second  volume  of  Feet  of  Fines,  under  the 


vi  SOMERSET  RECORD  SOCIETY  REPORT. 

editorship  of  Mr.  Green,  will  be  printed,  and  probably  in  1899  a 
second  volume  of  Prae-Reformation  Churchwarden  Accounts.  The 
claim  of  the  Society  on  the  assistance  of  all  lovers  of  Somerset  and 
its  history  rests  on  the  eleven  volumes  which  it  has  now  issued,  and 
it  pleads  for  a  recognition  of  this  claim  and  for  further  funds  to 
enable  it  to  carry  on  the  work  with  success  in  the  future.  The 
Secretary  again  desires  to  say  that  he  will  gladly  give  any  further 
information  that  may  be  desired. 

T.   S.   HOLMES. 

WooKEY  Vicarage. 


NO         »0      NO 


f^ 


xrt     \r% 


fO 


^  \0       O^      ^ 


> 

*                   •                   • 
■                                      » 

H 

»                   •                   » 

•  •                   • 

•  •                   ■ 

U4 

•                   ■                   • 

u 

i   ■     ■     ■ 

O 

CO 

VO 

*  1 

On 
1 

lO 

*> 

Q 

On 

00 

.2     g 

C^ 

k 

nee 
cript 
rest  < 

O 

1 

-i   1    ^ 
«   '.?   ^ 

U 

%) 

t 

r          ' 

^ 

^-    o    o   o    o 

1^ 

i  /or 

^.    o    o    ^    o 

» 

r 

•  •                •                « 

•  •                    a                    ■ 

UJ 

^ 

•  •                ■                • 

•  •                •                • 
»                •                •                • 

CO 

^ 

Ci:: 

5     :     :     :     . 

^          •          •          •          • 

Ul\ 

e3  .  .  . 

>*    •     •     • 

^—-< 

wT     :     :  73 

o 

olme 

arris 
iinar 

CO 

:i:  n  D::  » 

• 


J: 

a;    I:: 

o  s 


^    O 

c 

OS 

a; 

8 

cS 
X 


cq 
O 


C     O     O     O  O     0«  NO 

W     O     •-•     O  O    NO     W 

•  «••■•• 

•  ■                  a                 •  •                 •                 « 

.C  *        '        ' 

u 

.              •               ■  ... 

•       ^^  •         • 

»            •            •         w^  •            •            • 

':          -    ^  '^    o    o 

^         S  5    ««    o 

g^  -5     :  o  I    S  I 

m  S       a  «  K  tS 


ro 


fO 


ro  VO    QO     tn 


tn   ^   ^ 


VO     - 
ro 


^  ^   S  *J  8  - 

4/      3      O      « 


«    <0    w    ^    w    «  r<^ 


00 


NO 


ia 


Councif. 

THE  RIGHT  REVEREND  BISHOP  HOBHOUSE,  D.D. 
SIR  C.  K.  MAXWELL  LYTE,  M.A.,  K.C.B. 
REV.  W.  HUx\T,  M.A. 
EMANUEL  GREEN,  F.S.A. 
J.  F.  HORNER,  ESQ.,  M.A. 
H.  HOBHOUSE,  ESQ.,  M.P. 
C.  E.  H.  CHADWYCK-HEALEV,  ESQ.,  Q.C. 
REV.     PREBENDARY      T.      S.      HOLMES,      M.A.,      HON. 
SECRETARY, 

VOLUMES  ALREADY  ISSUED. 

1887.  Bishop     Drokensford's     Reg^ister.       Calendared    by    Bishop 

HOBHOUSE. 

1888.  Somerset  Chantries.     Edited  by  E.  Green,  F.S.A 

1889.  Kirby's   Quest   for   Somerset.     Edited  by  the   late   F.    H. 

Dickinson,  Esq. 

1890.  Prae-Reformation  Churchwardens'  Accounts  in  Somerset 

Parishes.     Edited  by  Bishop  Hobhouse, 

1891.  Custumaria  of  Xlllth  Century  Abbots  of  Glastonbury. 

C.  J.  Elton,  Q.C. 

1892.  Pedes  Finium  for  Somerset.     Edited  by  E.  Green,  F.S.A. 

1893.  Two  Chartularies  of  the  Priory  of  Bath.    Edited  by  the 

Rev.  W.  Hunt,  M.A. 

1894.  Bruton  and  Montacute  Cartularies.     Edited  by  Sir  C.  H. 

Maxwell  Lyte,  M.A.,  and  T.  S.  Holmes,  M.A. 

1896.    Registrum  Radulphi  de  Salopia.    2  vols.    Edited  by  Rev.  T. 
S.  Holmes,  M.A. 


A/osl  of  tlie  above  volumes  can  be  obtained  from  the  Secretary. 


ConttntB* 


PAGE 

Report  ^ 

List  of  Subscribers      ..••••** 

PREFACE      ...••••'  ^^.j 

INTRODUCTION  .  .  •  '  ^ 

SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS     .  • 

457 
INDEX   OF  MATTERS  •  •  • 

Persons  and  Places  ..••••       "^  ^ 


Bitft  of  ^u60m6er0* 


Antiquaries,  The  Society  of,  Burlington  House. 
Arch/eolooical  Society,  The  Somerset,  Taunton. 
Archbold,  W.  a.,  6 1,  St.  Andrew's  Street,  Cambridge. 

Badcock,  H.,  Taunton. 

Bath  Field  Club,  49,  Pulteney  Street,  Bath. 

Bailward,  H.,  Horsington,  Somerset. 

Baker,  E.  E.,  F.S.A.,  Weston-super-Mare. 

Bates,  Rev.  E.  H.,  Bayford,  Wincanton. 

Batten,  J.,  Aldon,  Yeovil. 

Beadon,  Miss,  Warminster,  Wilts. 

Bennett,  Mrs.,  2,  Bradmore  Road,  Oxford. 

Bernard,  Rev.  Canon,  High  Hall,  Wimborne. 

Birkbeck,  Rev.  W.  J.,  The  Vicarage,  Salisbury. 

Blathwayt,  Lieut. -Col.,  Batheaston,  Bath. 

Bodleian  Library,  The,  Oxford. 

Boston,  The  Public  Library,  Boston,  U.S.A.,  care  of  Triibner  and  Co. 

Bothamley,  Ven.  Archdeacon,  Bath. 

BouRDiLLON,  E.  D.,  Dinder  House,  Wells,  Somerset. 

Braikenridge,  W.  Jerdone,  16,  Royal  Crescent,  Bath. 

Bramble,  Lieut. -Col.,  Seafield,  Weston-super-Mare. 

Bristol,  Museum  Reference  Library,  Queen's  Road,  Bristol. 

British  Museum  Library,  care  of  Dulau  and  Co.,  Soho  Square. 

Broadmead,  W.  B.,  Enmore  Park,  Bridgwater. 

Brownlow,  Right  Rev.  Dr.,  Bishop's  House,  Clifton,  Bristol. 

Buckle,  Edmund,  23,  Bedford  Row,  London, 


LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS.  XI 


BuLLEiD,  J.  G.,  Glastonbury. 

BuLLER,  Rev.  Prebendary,  North  Curry,  Taunton. 

Bush,  T.  S.,  Dale  Cottage,  Charlcombe,  near  Bath. 

Cambridge  University  Library,  Cambridge. 

Carlingford,  Right  Hon.  Lord.  The  Priory,  Chewton  Mendip,  Bath. 

Cartwright,  Rev.  H.  A.,  Whitestaunton,  Chard. 

Chadwyck-Healey,  C.  E.  H.,  Q.C,  New  Place,  Porlock. 

Church,  Rev.  Canon  C.  M.,  Wells,  Somerset. 

Clark,  W.  S.,  Street,  Glastonbury. 

Clark,  G.  T.,  Talygarn,  Llantrissant. 

Coleman,  Rev.  J.,  Vicars  Close,  Wells,  Somerset. 

Coles,  Rev.  V.  S.  S.,  Pusey  House,  Oxford. 

Cork  and  Orrery,  The  Right  Hon.  The  Earl  of,  Marston,  Frome. 

Corner,  S.,  Esq.,  B.A.,  B.Sc,  26,  Forest  Road  West,  Nottingham. 

Cotterel,  T.  Sturge,  The  Lodge,  Yatton,  Somerset. 

CowiE,  The  Very  Rev.  B.  M.,  Dean  of  Exeter,  The  Deanery. 

Daniel,  Rev.  W.  E.,  East  Pennard,  Shepton  Mallet, 

Day,  H.  C.  A.,  Oriel  Lodge,  Clevedon,  Somerset. 

Daubeny,  W.,  I,  Cavendish  Crescent,  Bath. 

Davey,  The  Right  Hon.  Ix)rd,  86,  Brook  Street,  London,  W. 

Duckworth,  Rev.  W.  A.,  Orchardleigh  Park,  P>ome. 

Edwards,  Sir  G.,  Stoke  Bishop,  Bristol. 

Ellis,  Rev.  J.  H.,  29,  Collingham  Gardens,  South  Kensington. 

Elworthy,  F.  T.,  Foxdown,  Wellington,  Somerset. 

Fane,  The  Hon.  Sir  Spencer  Ponsonby,  Brympton,  Yeovil. 

Floyd,  W.,  39,  Russell  Square,  London. 

FoxcRorr,  E.  T.  D.,  Hinton  Charterhooise,  Bath. 

Foxcroft,  Mrs.,  Hinton  Charterhouse,  Bath. 

Fry,  The  Right  Hon.  Sir  Edward,  Failand  House,  Failand,  near  Bristol. 

Fry,  E.  a.,  172,  Edmund  Street,  Birmingham. 

George,  W.,  S.  Wulfstan'^,  Durdham  Park,  Bristol. 


Xll  LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS. 


GiBBS,  Antony,  Tyntesfield,  Nailsea. 

GiBBs,  H.  Martin,  Barrow  Court,  Flax  Bourton,  R.S.O. 

Glastonbury  Antiquarian  Society,  The,  Glastonbury. 

Grafton,  Rev.  A.,  Vicarage,  Castle  Cary. 

Green,  Emanuel,  F.S.A.,  Reform  Club,  Pall  Mall. 

Guildhall  Library,  London,  E.C. 

Hall,  J.  P.,  Esq.,  Sharcombe,  Wells,  Somersets 
Hallett,  T.  p.  G.,  Claverton  Lodge,  Bath. 
Hancock,  Rev.  F.,  Sel worthy  Vicarage,  Taunton. 
Harris,  R.,  Wells,  Somerset 

Harvard    College  Library,   The,   Cambridge,    Mass.,    U.S.A;  care  of 

Triibner  and  Co. 
Harvard  Law  Library,  care  of  Triibner  and  Co. 
Harvey,  Rev.  Sydenham,  Wedmore  Vicarage,  Weston-super-Mare. 
Hawkesbury,  Right  Hon.  Lord,  Cockglode,  Ollerton,  Newark. 
Hellier,  Rev.  H.  G.,  Nempnett  Vicarage,  Chew  Stoke,  Bristol. 
Herringham,  Rev.  Prebendary,  Old  Cleeve  Rectory,  Taunton. 
HiCKES,  Rev.  T.  H.  F.,  Draycot  Vicarage,  Cheddar. 
Hobhouse,  The  Right  Rev.  Bishop,  Wells,  Somerset. 
Hobhouse,  H.,  Esq.,  M.P.,  Hadspen  House,  Castle  Cary. 
Hobhouse,  Mrs.  E.,  New  Street,  Wells,  Somerset 
Hodgkinson,  W.  S.,  Esq.,  Glencot,  Wells,  Somerset 
Honnywill,  Rev.  J.  E.  W.,  Leigh  on  Mendip  Vicarage,  Coleford,  Bath. 
Holmes,  Rev.  Prebendary,  Wookey  Vicarage,  Wells,  Somerset 
Hook,  Rev.  Prebendary,  Porlock  Vicarage,  Taunton. 
Horner,  F.,  Mells  Park,  Frome. 

Hoskins,  Rev.  C.  T.,  North  Perrott  Rectory,  Crewkerne. 
Hoskins,  H.  W.  p.,  26,  St  Leonard's  Terrace,  Chelsea,  London,  S.W. 
Hudd,  a.  E.,  Clinton  House,  94,  Pembroke  Road,  CHfton. 
Humphreys,  A.  L.,  187,  Piccadilly,  London,  W. 

Hunt,  Rev.  W.,  24,  Phillimore  Gardens,  Campden  Hill,  Kensington,  W. 
Hutchings,  Hubert,  Sandford  Orcas,  Sherborne. 


LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS.  Xlil 


Hylton,  Lord,  Ammerdown  Park,  Radstock. 

Jenkyns,  Sir  H.,  Riverside,  East  Molesey,  Surrey. 
J  ex-Blake,  Very  Rev.  T.  W.,  The  Deanery,  Wells. 

Kennion,  The  Right  Rev.  Dr.,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Wells,  The  Palace, 

Wells,  Somerset. 
King,  Austin  J.,  13,  Queen's  Square,  Bath. 

Lawrence,  G.,  Esq.,  Crickleaze,  Chard. 

Lincoln's  Inn  Library,  London,  W.C. 

London  Library,  St.  James'  Square,  S.W. 

Long,  Col.  W.,  Congresbury,  R.S.O.,  Somerset. 

Luttrell,  G.  F.,  Dunster  Castle,  Dunster. 

Lyte,  Sir  Henry  Maxwell,  K.C.B.,  3,  Portman  Square,  London. 

Master,  Rev.  G.  S.,  Flax  Bourton,  R.S.O.,  Somerset. 

Medley,  Rev.  J.  B.,  Tyntesfield,  Nailsea. 

Melliar  Foster-Melliar,  W.  M.,  North  Aston,  Deddington,  Oxon. 

MoGG,  W.  Rees,  Cholwell  House,  Temple  Cloud,  Bristol. 

New  York  Public  Library. 

Norman,  Dr.,  12,  Brock  Street,  Bath. 

NoRRis,  H.,  South  Petherton. 

Owen's    College    Library,   care  of  J.   E.  Cornish,   St.  Ann's    Square, 
Manchester. 

Paget,  Sir  R.,  Bart.,  M.P.,  Cranmore  Hall,  Shepton  Mallet 

Pearce,  E.,  Taunton. 

Perceval,  Cecil  H.  S.,  Henbury,  Bristol. 

Phelips,  W.,  Montacute,  Somerset,  S.O. 

PoYNTON,  Rev.  F.  J.,  Kelston  Rectory,  Bath. 

Prankerd,  S.  D.,  The  Knoll,  Sneyd  Park,  Bristol. 

Quicke,  Rev.  C.  P.,  Ashbrittle  Rectory,  Wellington,  Somerset. 
Quirk,  Rev.  Canon,  16,  Camden  Crescent,  Bath. 

Rawle,  E.  J.,  Esq.,  10,  Colville  Terrace,  London,  W. 

Rogers,  T.  £.,  Chancellor  of  Bath  and  Wells,  Yarlington  House,  Wincanton. 


xiv  LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS. 


RowE,  J.  Brooking,  Castle  Barbican,  Plympton. 

Sanford,  W.  A-,  Esq.,  Nynehead  Court,  Wellington,  Somerset. 

ScARTH,  Leveson,  Esq.,  Elmlsea,  Cleveland  Walk,  B;.th. 

Sherborne  School  Library,  The  School,  Sherborne. 

Singer,  J.  W.,  Frome. 

Skrine,  H.  M.,  Warleigh  Manor,  Bath. 

Skrine,  H.  D.,  Claverton  Manor,  Bath. 

Smith,  Rev.  Gilbert,  Rectory,  Barton  S.  Davids,  Somenon. 

SoMERviLLE,  A-  F.,  Dinder,  Wells,  Somerset 

Stephenson,  Rev.  J.  H.,  Lympsham  Rectory,  Weston-super-Mare. 

Stoate,  W.,  Belmont,  Bumham. 

Strachev,  Sir  E.,  Bart.,  Sutton  Court,  Pensford,  Bristol. 

Sully,  P.  N.,  The  Lawn,  Wellington,  Somerset 

Thatcher,  E.  J.,  Fairfield  House,  Knowle,  Bristol. 

Thompson,  Rev.  Archer,  Weston,  Bath. 

TiTE,  C,  Shutes  House,  Wellington,  Somerset 

TiTE,  Mrs.,  Shutes  House,  Wellington,  Somerset. 

Trevilian,  E.  B.  Cely,  Midelney  Place,  Curry  Rivel,  Taunton. 

TucKETT,  R.  C,  4,  Exchange  Buildings  East,  Bristol 

Tyndale,  J.  W.  Warre,  Evercreech,  Bath. 

Vaughan-Pryse,  Mrs.,  Bwlchbychan,  Llanbyther,  South  Wales. 
Wadham  College  Library,  Oxford. 
Watts,  B.  H.,  13,  Queen  Square,  Bath. 
Weaver,  Rev.  F.  W.,  Milton  Vicarage,  Evercreech,  Bath. 
Wells,  The  Cathedral  Library,  Somerset. 
Wells,  The  Theological  College  Library,  Somerset. 
Whale,  Rev.  J.  W.,  Mountnessing,  Weston,  Bath. 
Wills,  Sir  W.  H.,  Bart.,  Blagdon,  Somerset. 
WiNWOOD,  Rev.  H.  H.,  ii.  Cavendish  Crescent,  Bath. 
Wood,  F.  A.,  Highfield,  Chew  Magna,  Somerset 

Wordsworth,  The  Right   Rev.  J.,   Lord   Bishop  of  Salisbury,  The 
Palace,  Salisbury. 


(preface^ 


When  the  council  of  the  Somerset  Record  Society  decided  to 
proceed  with  the  work  of  which  this  volume  is  an  instalment,  and  did 
me  the  honour  to  invite  me  to  make  the  beginning,  I  ventured  to 
express  the  hope  that  it  might  be  possible  to  print  the  records  in 
the  contracted  Latin  of  the  originals  side  by  side  with  an  English 
translation.  Unfortunately  this  was  found  to  be  impracticable.  It 
only  remained,  therefore,  to  render  the  Latin  into  English  in  a  form 
which,  while  sacrificing  style,  should  suffice  to  satisfy  those  readers 
who  are  familiar  with  the  formal  manner  of  expression  of  the 
thirteenth  century  clerks,  of  the  sufficient  fidelity  of  the  translation. 
It  was  considered  expedient  not  to  confine  the  scope  of  the  book  to 
the  pleas  actually  heard  within  the  county,  but  to  collect  from  the  rolls 
of  other  parts  of  England  the  entries  relating  to  Somerset.  In  this 
way  we  are  able  to  trace  proceedings  through  their  various  stages, 
and  to  gain  a  much  better  impression  of  the  general  course  of  litiga- 
tion. I  believe  that  these  rolls,  the  importance  of  which  to  students 
of  early  English  institutions  can  scarcely  be  exaggerated,  have  not 
hitherto  been  dealt  with  systematically  in  this  way. 

The  size  of  the  volume  has  made  it  impossible  to  bring  the  work 
down  to  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Henry  III.,  a  date  which  may  be 
said  to  mark  a  period  in  legal  history.  An  effort  has  been  made  to 
include  the  two  great  rolls  of  lesser  assizes  taken  before  Bracton  him- 
self, and  the  county  pleas  from  them  are  now  before  the  reader. 


xvi  PREFACE. 


I  desire  to  express  my  hearty  thanks  to  Sir  Henry  Maxwell  Lyte, 
K.C.B.,  Deputy  Keeper  of  Public  Records,  for  the  valuable  assistance 
which  his  local  knowledge  has  enabled  him  to  give  in  the  identifica- 
tion of  places,  often  by  no  means  an  easy  task.  Mr.  S.  R.  ScargiU- 
Bird,  an  Assistant  Keeper  of  the  Records,  whose  enjoyment  of  an 
almost  undecipherable  passage  seems  to  be  only  equalled  by  his  skill 
in  reading  it,  has  again  and  again  helped  the  progress  of  the  work 
to  an  extent  for  which  I  cannot  sufficiently  thank  him.  To  Mr. 
Salisbury,  Mr.  Overend,  and  other  officers  of  the  department  I  am 
much  indebted  for  unfailing  kindness  and  consideration.  I  am  also 
indebted  to  Professor  Maitland  for  his  help  kindly  given  upon  some 
obscure  points.  The  transcript  of  the  records  was  made,  with  careful 
observance  of  all  contractions  and  marginal  notes,  by  Mr.  Arthur  F. 
Heintz.  The  accuracy  with  which  his  work  was  done  (and  I  have 
had  innumerable  opportunities  of  checking  it)  has  been  of  great 
assistance.  The  index  of  names  and  places  has  been  prepared  by 
Mr.  J.  Vacy  Lyle  of  the  Public  Record  Office. 

C.  K.  H.  C.-H. 


3n^obttC^on» 


The  contents  of  this  volume  possess  more  than  the  local  interest 
which  their  title  suggests.  The  county  historian  and  the  genealogist 
will  find  matter  of  value  which  has  hitherto  been  unpublished.  But 
the  chief  interest  of  these  rolls  is  the  light  which  they  throw 
upon  the  development  of  our  legal  system,  and  in  the  glimpses  which 
they  afford  of  social  life  in  the  first  half  of  the  13th  century.  To 
borrow  the  words  of  a  French  writer,*  who  has  made  early  English 
subjects  his  special  study,  these  matters  are  of  special  interest  to 
us  in  England,  because  in  no  other  country  in  Europe  are  the  insti- 
tutions, the  manners  and  beliefs  of  the  present  day,  so  directly  the 
product  of  social  conditions  five  centuries  old.  In  this  book  we  see 
legal  procedure  still  in  an  experimental  stage.  The  work  begun  by 
our  great  administrator  Henry  II  in  his  far-seeing  efforts  to  diminish 
the  power  of  his  barons  and  to  attach  the  commonalty  to  the  crown, 
in  particular  the  introduction  of  the  jury  of  presentment  in  criminal 
matters  and  of  the  recognitors  of  the  grand  and  the  lesser  assizes,  is 
undergoing  development.  We  notice  in  the  earlier  days  of  our 
period  an  elasticity  in  the  use  of  the  jury  which  gradually  disappears. 
In  the  early  years  of  Henry  III  the  justices  seem  to  have  been 
trying  experiments.  Sometimes  a  man  is  convicted  by  the  voice  of 
jurors  selected  from  one  hundred,  sometimes  from  several  hundreds 
of  the  county.  With  them  may  be  associated  the  representatives  of 
varying  numbers  of  townships.  There  seems  to  be  no  rule.  Not 
many  years  pass,  and  we  find  the  practice  to  all  appearance  settled. 
The  jurors  of  the  hundred  and  of  the  four  townships  decide  the 
prisoner's  fate.  We  see  the  ordeal  in  use  and  we  note  its  disappear- 
ance.    As  time  runs  on  the  judicial  duel  becomes  unpopular  and 

*  M.  Jusserand.  **  Ces  probl^mes  ofTrent  en  Angleterre  un  int^ret  special,  parce 
qu'en  aucun  pays  d'Europe  les  institutions,  les  mceurs  les  croyances  de  Theure  pr&ente 
De  sont  le  produit  aussi  direct  de  T^tat  social  d'il  y  a  dn^  cent  ans.  Cest  pourquoi 
ces  ^udes  ne  5ont  peut-6tre  pas  d^pourvues  de  cette  utility  pratique  si  recherch^e  en 
notre  temps :  pour  les  peuples,  comme  pour  les  individus,  ce  n'est  souvent  qu'en 
sachant  d'ouils  viennent  quon  pent  pr^oir  ou  ils  vont."  ^*  La  vu  Nomade  et  les 
rmUa  d* Angleterre  au  ntoyen  age,**    Pref. 

C 


xviii  INTRODUCTION. 


greater  recourse  is  had  to  the  jury.  Jury  in  the  modem  meaning  of 
the  term  we  do  not  find,  but  its  germ  is  to  be  seen  clearly  enough.  It 
is  interesting  to  notice  the  gradual  expansion  of  procedure,  the  invention 
of  new  forms  to  meet  new  circumstances  as  they  arise,  to  see  the 
technical  mind  wrestling  with  the  necessity  and  expediency  of  the 
hour,  to  note  the  gradual  substitution  of  the  crown  or  public  prose- 
cution for  the  private  appeal  in  criminal  matters  and  in  comparing 
the  proceedings  on  a  13th  century  eyre  with  those  on  one  of  our  own 
day,  to  grasp  how  much  of  the  system  of  which  we  English  are  justly 
proud,  has  its  roots  far  back  in  the  time  of  our  Angevin  kings.  The 
"  pleas  of  the  crown,"  the  crown  cases,  show  us  how  almost  every  one 
was  made  to  feel  that  he  was  part  of  the  great  judicial  machine,  that 
he  was,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  personally  responsible  for  the 
preservation  of  order.  This  responsibility  of  the  individual,  and  his 
share  in  the  administration  of  justice  from  the  earliest  times,  cannot 
but  have  contributed  materially  to  the  development,  of  the  public 
spirit  which  we  are  accustomed  to  regard  as  characteristic  of  the 
English  people. 

We  cannot  fail  too^  to  be  struck  by  the  amount  of  travelling 
which  people  did  in  the  13th  century.  The  ways,  if  we  except  the 
great  trunk  roads  of  Roman  origin,  were  so  bad  as  to  be  almost 
impassable,  except  in  summer.  The  main  roads  were  probably  kept 
in  fair  repair,  for  the  traffic  upon  them  must  have  been  considerable. 
The  approaches  to  the  monastic  houses  were  also  no  doubt  well 
maintained.  It  was  important  to  their  occupants,  possessed  as  they 
mostly  were  of  estates  in  widely  distant  places,  that  they  should  have 
easy  and  convenient  means  of  visitation.'  The  King  himself,  with 
his  large  following,  was  constantly  on  the  move  through  the  land. 
The  chief  landowners  also  must  have  been  frequent  travellers,  passing 
to  and  fro  from  one  estate  to  another.  In  England  it  was  not  as 
it  was  on  the  continent  of  Europe.  The  property  of  an  English 
magnate  was,  as  a  rule,  distributed  in  several  counties,  often  widely  dis- 
tant one  from  the  other,  instead  of  lying  all  together  round  the  family 
castle.  This  was  the  result  of  the  Conqueror's  policy  to  limit  the 
power  or  influence  of  his  barons.  The  royal  justices  also,  with  their 
attendant  trains  of  clerks  and  officers,  were  frequently  to  be  seen 
passing  from  shire  to  shire,  drawing  after  them  as  they  went  a  great 
crowd  of  recognitors,  parties,  essoiners  and  others.  We  see,  from  the 
contents  of  this  volume  alone,  that  in  1247  Roger  de  Thurkelby  was 
in  Oxfordshire,  Northamptonshire,  Bedfordshire  and  Buckinghamshire. 
The  following  year  he  was  in  Gloucestershire  and  Berkshire,  and  in 
1249    at  Exeter.     During  the  same  period   Henry  of  Bath    visited 

'  Thorold  Rogers,  **  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices,"  Vol.  I,  p.  654. 


INTRODUCTION.  XIX 


Cambridgeshire,  Huntingdonshire,  Hertfordshire,  Hampshire  and 
Wiltshire.  There  were  humbler  travellers  also.  We  hear  of  the 
itinerant  minstrels,  the  pilgrims,  the  friars,  the  men  of  business,  and 
traders,  to  say  nothing  of  the  rogues  and  vagabonds  whose  number 
was  legion.  The  roads  were  far  from  safe  for  solitary  wayfarers.  It 
has  been  pointed  out'  that  this  constant  circulation  of  people  through- 
out the  country  was  not  without  great  social  consequences.  By  such 
means  information  was  passed  from  place  to  place — the  spread  of 
ideas  was  encouraged.  The  nomadic  population  served  to  unite 
distant  parts.  The  north  was  brought  into  contact  with  the  south, 
the  east  with  the  west.  The  importance  of  all  this  travelling  must 
strike  us  forcibly  when  we  remember  how  scattered  the  comparatively 
small  population  of  the  country  must  have  been.  Bishop  Lightfoot 
gives  the  population  of  England  in  the  i3tb  century  as  2^  millions 
according  to  the  highest  estimate,  but  at  i^  millions  according  to  a 
lower  and  more  probable  estimate.*  The  southern  and  eastern 
portions  of  the  country,  which  might  be  marked  off  by  a  line  joining 
Norfolk  and  Dorset,  were  the  more  thickly  populated.  London  had 
about  40,000  inhabitants,  and  Winchester,  the  next  largest  city,  about 

IO,OGO. 

Now  a  few  words  as  to  the  "  sorts  and  conditions  of  men,"  subjects  of 
the  King,  in  the  13th  century,  and  how  they  stood  in  relation  to  the 
King's  courts.  It  is  not  necessary  here  to  speak  of  aliens  ;  the  rules 
affecting  them  were  only  in  course  of  formation  during  the  period 
covered  by  this  book.  A  first  and  broad  classification  obviously 
suggests  itself.  They  were  either  free  or  unfree.  But  this  division  is 
not  sufficient  for  our  purpose.  True  it  was,  that  in  the  sight  of  the  law 
aU  free  men  from  the  baron  downwards  were  equal,  but  all  free  men 
were  not  equally  rightful.  We  shall  see  that  some  of  the  free  had  no 
proprietary  rights,  and  that  the  measure  of  protection  meted  out  to  them 
was  not  always  the  same.  Nor  would  it  be  true  to  say  that  all  unfree 
men  had  no  proprietary  rights,  or  that  all  unfree  men  were  equally 
unprotected  by  the  courts.  A  person  ''professed  in  religion  "  had  no 
proprietary  rights.  A  villein,  if  he  could  obtain  land  from  another 
than  his  lord,  could  hold  it  against  every  one,  so  long  as  his  lord  did 
not  seize  it  for  himself,  as  he  was  entitled  to  do.  Indeed,  we  may  say 
that  a  villein  might  be  civilly  rightless  against  the  whole  world,  but  he 
might  also  be  rightful  as  between  himself  and  anyone  other  than  his 
lord.  If  the  latter  chose  to  exercise  the  rights  to  which  the  personal 
relations  of  his  villein  to  himself  entitled  him,  the  villein  would  be  with- 

'  Jussennd,  p.  158  and  p.  246. 

•  "  Lectures  on  the  I3tn  Century,"  p.  99,  ed.  1896.     .Sec  alj,o  Thofold  Koger«, 
**  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices,    VoL  I.  p.  57. 


XX  INTRODUCTION. 


out  civil  rights  against  a  third  party.  On  the  other  hand,  if  his  lord 
permitted  him  to  hold  property,  the  villein  had  all  remedies  in  respect 
of  it  against  third  parties.  There  is  not  included  in  this  proposition 
the  land  which  he  held  in  villeinage.  A  free  man  holding  in  villeinage 
was  no  better  off  in  respect  of  such  land.  He  too  was  rightless. 
That  was  in  consequence  of  the  doctrine  that  the  possession  of  a 
tenant  in  villeinage  was  the  p>ossession  of  him  who  had  the  freehold.^ 
Again,  it  has  even  been  said  that  a  villein  could  implead  his  lord 
upon  a  covenant  by  the  latter.'  If  a  villein  ran  away,  left  his 
"  nest "  as  the  term  ¥^as,  his  lord  had  a  right  to  recover  him.  The 
fugitive  might  be  captured  if  it  could  be  done  within  four  days,  or  if  he 
returned  to  his  nest  But  otherwise  the  lord  might  not  help  himself. 
He  had  to  seek  the  assistance  of  a  court,  and  then  the  fugitive  might 
have  a  chance  of  proving,  if  he  could,  that  he  was  a  free  man. 
No.  729  in  this  book  is  an  example  of  this  process.  There  the  lord 
sought  his  villein  through  the  county  court.  The  latter  obtained  the 
royal  writ  de  libertate  sua  probanda^  which  brought  the  matter  before  the 
justices. 

Again,  there  were  the  "privileged  villeins,"  or  villein  socmen, 
tenants  of  ancient  demesne,  that  is  of  land  in  manors  which  at  the 
time  of  the  Conquest  had  belonged  to  the  Crown.  These  tenants 
formed  a  class  intermediate  between  the  free  tenants  and  those  holding 
in  pure  villeinage.  Their  holding  was  base,  but  their  service  was  certain. 
For  them  there  were  special  remedies.  They  had  the  **  little  writ  of 
right  close,"  so  called  because  it  was  directed'to  the  bailiffs  of  the 
manor,  instead  of  to  the  sheriff  or  royal  justices,  upon  questions 
between  the  tenants  themselves,  or  between  a  tenant  and  his  lord  as  to 
the  land  itself,  and  the  ^^  monstramrunt^^  so  styled  because  the  writ 
recited  the  plaint  of  the  tenant  or  tenants,  "  monstravit  or  monstraverunt 
so  and  so,"  as  to  the  services  exacted  for  the  land.  Yet  again,  in  ancient 
demesne  there  was  another  but  limited  class,  the  "  conventioners," 
recent  comers  upon  the  manor  who  had  taken  tenements  under  agree- 
ments. They  performed  services  similar  to  those  of  the  socmen,  but 
they  did  not  belong  to  the  privileged  class.  Bracton  thought  that 
their  rights  were  not  "  real,"  but  merely  contractual.  Others  thought 
that  they  might  have  the  benefit  of  the  possessory  assizes,  and  if  so 
they  would  be  regarded  as  freeholders.  But  this  is  not  the  place  to 
attempt  the  difficult  task  of  distinguishing  precisely  the  different  classes 
of  tenants  of  ancient  demesne. 

It   has   been   said  that    those  who   "entered    religion"  became 
civilly  dead.      This  really  meant  that  the  monk  became  incapable 

^  Vinogradoff,  p.  69. 

2  Vmogradoff,  p.  70.     Digby,  "  Kcal  Properly,"  I5I  E<1.,  p.  1 12 ;  3rd  Ed.,  p.  128. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXI 


of  holding  or  acquiring  property.  When  a  man  became  "professed 
in  religion,"  his  heirs  at  once  inherited ;  if  he  had  made  a  will  it 
at  once  took  effect.  If  his  kinsman  from  whom  in  the  ordinary 
course  he  would  have  inherited,  died,  he  would  be  passed  over  in 
the  succession,  as  if  no  longer  in  the  land  of  the  living.^  The 
main  principle  was  that  the  "  religious "  could  not  have  any  property. 
He  might  do  or  suffer  wrong.  If  a  monk  committed  felony  he  was 
treated  as  an  ordained  clerk ;  for  smaller  offences  he  could  be  tried  by 
the  temporal  courts  and  imprisoned.  As  to  torts  or  civil  wrongs  a 
monk  could  not  sue  or  be  sued  without  his  "  sovereign."  The  abbot 
seems  to  have  been  entitled  to  receive  any  compensation  that  became 
due  for  damage  done  to  the  monk,  and  to  be  liable  for  the  damage 
that  the  monk  did.  A  monk  could  make  no  contract,  but  he  could  act 
as  the  agent  for  his  **  sovereign,"  the  head  of  his  house,  and  we  know 
that  they  were  constantly  engaged  in  buying  and  selling  and  otherwise 
on  behalf  of  their  houses. 

The  ordained  clerk  was  subject  to  ecclesiastical  law  and  procedure, 
with  which  we  have  nothing  to  do  here,  and  also  to  the  temporal  law  and 
procedure,  with  certain  exceptions.  He  had  full  proprietary  rights  and 
remedies.  The  temporal  law  protected  his  possession  and  property, 
and  enforced  his  contracts  as  if  he  were  a  layman.  His  person  was 
equally  protected.  On  the  other  hand,  all  the  ordinary  civil  actions 
could  be  brought  against  him,  and  for  any  crime  that  fell  short  of 
felony  he  could  be  tried  and  punished  in  the  ordinary  way.  For  felony 
the  ordained  clerk  could  be  tried  only  in  the  ecclesiastical  court,  and 
could  be  punished  only  by  such  punishment  as  that  court  could  inflict, 
which  did  not  include  the  death  penally.  This  was  the  **  benefit  of 
clergy,"  which  in  later  years  became  the  privilege  of  anyone  who  could 
read  a  verse  of  the  Bible.  If  a  clerk  were  arrested  for  murder,  he 
would  be  delivered  to  the  bishop  if  demanded,  and  the  latter  would  be 
bound  over  to  produce  him  before  the  justices  on  their  next  coming  to 
the  county.  In  the  meanwhile  he  was  kept  in  the  bishop's  prison. 
When  the  justices  came,  and  an  accused  clerk  was  before  them  on  a 
charge  of  felony,  he  might  say  that  he  was  not  bound  to  answer  there, 
and  if  the  official  of  the  bishop  demanded  him,  he  would  be  handed 
over  without  more  ado.  Towards  the  end  of  the  reign  of  Henry  III, 
notwithstanding  that  the  accused  was  handed  over,  an  inquest  by  the 
county  was  held  before  the  justices  as  to  his  guilt.  The  man  was  not 
tried^  for  he  had  not  pleaded  or  submitted  to  the  jurisdiction.  If  the 
verdict  was  favourable,  the  accused  was  acquitted  so  far  as  the  temporal 

'  See  "  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  I,  416-421  and  page  419,  where  this  riddle  b 
propoaoded  : — '*  When  can  a  man  sue  his  own  executors  ?  When  owing  money  to  a 
BKKiasiery  he  becomes,  professed  in  it,  and  afterwards  abbot  of  il." 


XXll  INTRODUCTION. 


court  could  acquit  him.  If  it  was  unfavourable,  he  was  delivered  to  the 
bishop.  "In  the  one  case,  his  lands  and  goods,  if  they  have  been 
seized  by  the  royal  officer,  are  at  once  restored  to  him,  unless  he  has 
been  guilty  of  flight,  and  has  thus  forfeited  his  chattels ;  in  the  other 
case  they  will  be  retained  until  he  has  been  tried,  and  their  fate  will 
depend  upon  the  result  of  the  trial.  For  tried  he  has  not  yet  been. 
He  will  be  tried  in  the  bishop's  court."'  There  is  an  early  case  in  this 
volume  (No.  224),  which  seems  exceptional,  in  that  the  clerk  appears 
to  have  been  actually  tried.  But  it  may  be  that  his  plea  of  ordination 
was  doubtful,  and  it  is  to  be  noted  that  the  official  did  not  claim  him. 
The  privilej^e  was  not  confined  to  clerks  in  orders.  The  monks  were 
also  entitled  to  it  Although  the  secular  court  did  not  try  a  clerk  in  a 
case  of  felony,  it  insisted  that  he  should  be  accused  before  it,  and  if  he 
did  not  appear  he  was  outlawed  as  a  layman  might  be.  Again,  the  lay 
court  could  compel  appearance  by  a  clerk  by  distraining  his  ordinary. 

The  Jew,  although  a  free  man  to  all  the  world  but  one  man,  the  King, 
was  practically  the  latter*s  serf.  All  he  had  was  the  King's,  if  the  latter 
chose  to  demand  it.  The  Jews  do  not  figure  in  the  pleas  before  us ; 
indeed,  their  affairs  but  rarely  came  before  the  King's  courts.  There 
was  a  special  tribunal,  the  Exchequer  of  the  Jews,  which  heard  and  de- 
termined disputes  between  Jew  and  Christian.  The  court  seems  to 
have  aimed  at  and  acquired  a  competence,  and  an  exclusive  compe- 
tence, in  all  causes,  whether  civil  or  criminal,  in  which  a  Jew  was  impli- 
cated, unless  it  was  some  merely  civil  cause  between  two  Hebrews, 
which  could  be  left  to  a  purely  Jewish  tribunal ;'  and  as  between  Jews 
the  King  was  content  that  Jewish  law  should  be  administered  by  Jewish 
judges. 

The  leper  too  deserves  a  few  words.  He  could  not  sue,  nor  could 
he  make  a  gift  or  enter  into  a  contract.  As  a  person  professed  in  religion 
was  passed  over  and  could  not  inherit,  so  with  the  leper.  But  what 
property  was  his  before  his  segregation  remained  to  him.  Of  the  posi- 
tion of  lunatics  and  idiots  we  know  little  before  the  time  of  Edward  I, 
and  we  are  not  concerned  with  them  in  this  book. 

Nothing  has  been  said  so  far  of  the  effects  of  infancy.  It  will  be 
sufficient  to  say  here  that  an  infant  could  sue  and  be  sued.  He  sued 
in  his  proper  person,  for  he  could  not  appoint  an  attorney,  and  his 
guardian,  if  he  had  one,  could  not  represent  him  for  the  purpose.  He 
was  sued  in  his  own  name,  and  the  writ  was  silent  as  to  any  guardian 
ad  litem.  There  are  many  cases  on  the  rolls  before  us.  So  much  for 
the  men. 

Women  who  were  spinsters  or  widows  were  as  regards  private  rights 


1  « 

a 


«  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  I    p.  425. 
*•  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  I,  p.  453. 


INTRODUCTION.  xxill 


in  the  same  position  as  men,  though  postponed  under  the  rules  of  in- 
heritance,  but  they  had  no  public  rights  or  duties,  save  those  of  paying 
taxes  and  performing  such  services  as  they  might  perform  by  deputy. 
In  the  time  covered  by  the  pleas  before  us  she  could  not  bring  an 
appeal  of  felony  except  in  the  case  of  violence  to  her  person,  or  for  the 
murder  of  her  husband,  but  we  see  in  the  recorded  cases  the  procedure 
by  appeal  giving  way  to  the  procedure  by  indictment,  and  this  limitation 
upon  a  woman's  right  to  make  criminal  charges  is  becoming  of  little 
importance.  A  woman  who  had  a  husband  was  in  a  different  position. 
*'  The  main  idea  which  governs  the  law  of  husband  and  wife  is  not  that 
of  unity  of  person,  but  that  of  the  guardianship,  the  mundy  the  profitable 
guardianship  which  the  husband  has  over  the  wife  and  over  her  pro- 
perty."* The  wife  was  well  protected  by  the  courts.  No  suit  concerning 
her  land  was  well  founded  unless  she  was  a  party.  She  could  appoint 
an  attorney  for  herself  in  court,  often  her  husband,  but  she  might 
appoint  some  one  else.  A  husband  has  been  known  to  appoint  his 
wife  to  be  his  attorney.  There  were  means  by  which  a  wife  could 
obtain  the  interference  of  the  court  to  prevent  her  husband  from  ex- 
cluding her  from  the  enjoyment  of  her  own  land. 

It  only  remains  now  in  dealing  with  this  subject  to  refer  briefly  to 
the  class  of  the  King's  subjects  who,  by  reason  of  their  own  defaults, 
were  deprived  of  some  of  the  rights  which  but  for  those  defaults  they 
would  have  enjoyed.  Chief  amongst  ihem  were  the  outlaws  and  con- 
victed felons,  and  I  cannot  do  better  than  reproduce  here  a  passage 
from  a  monumental  work  to  which  I  am  under  considerable  obligation. 
I  refer  to  **The  History  of  the  English  Law."'  The  learned  authors 
are  writing  of  the  time  of  Bracton.*  **  The  outlaw's  life  is  very  insecure, 
one  may  not  in  Bracton's  day  kill  him  unless  he  is  resisting  capture  or 
fleeing  from  it ;  but  it  is  everyone's  duty  to  capture  him,  and  out  in 
Gloucestershire  and  Herefordshire  on  the  Welsh  march  custom  allows 
that  he  may  be  slain  at  any  time.  If,  knowing  his  condition,  one 
harbours  him,  one  commits  a  capital  crime.  He  is  a  *  lawless  man ' 
and  a  '  friendless  man.'  Of  every  proprietary,  possessory,  contractual 
right  he  is  deprived  ;  the  King  is  entitled  to  lay  waste  his  land,  and  it 
then  escheats  to  his  lord ;  he  forfeits  his  chattels  to  the  King ;  every 
contract,  every  bond  of  homage  or  fealty  in  which  he  is  engaged,  is 
dissolved.     If  the  King  inlaws  him,  he  comes  back  into  the  world  like  a 

»  •*  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  I,  p.  468. 

•  By  Sir  Frederick  Pollock  and  Prof.  Maitland. 

'  Vol.  I,  pp.  460-1.  Prof.  Maitland  considers  that  Bracton's  book  is  founded  on 
authorities  taken  from  the  rolls  beginning  in  1216  and  ending  in  1240,  with  some  few 
later  cases  down  to  1256.  He  thinks  that  Bracton  was  seriously  engaged  on  his  work 
in  1250 ;  but  that  he  never  revised  it  as  a  whole  after  1256.  See  Introduction  to 
"  Bracton'f  Note  Book,"  pp.  37-44. 


INTKOnUCTIUN. 


('i)iirt  cuuld  arqiiit  liim.    If  it  w.is  unfavourable,  liu  was  ili 
liislmp,     "  In  the  one  caso,  his  lands  and  goods,  if  i! 
sci/ctl  by  tlic  royal  oltlccr,  arc  at  once  restored  to  him, 
lnvn  Riiilty  of  flight,  and  bas  thus  forfeited  his  chatter 
r;isi'  they  will  bo  rL-laiiied  until  he  has  been  tried,  aiv. 
di>|ieinl  upon  the  result  of  the  trial.     For  tried  he  h, 
He  will  be  tried  in  ibe  bishoi.'s  court/"    There  is  an 
viihiino  (No.  224).  which  seems  e\ceptiuna],  in  thai  ' 
to  luive  lieen  actually  tried.     Hut  it  may  be  that  his  ■ 
w:i-i  d'liililfui,  and  it  is  to  lie  noted  that  the  official  ■' 
'The  jirivilete  was  mil  confined  lo  clerks  in  orders 
alsK  entitled  to  il.     Although  the  secular  court  did 
i\ise  (if  felony,  il  insisted  lluil  he  should  be  accusal 
did  not  appear  he  was  outlawed  as  a  layman  niigh' 
court  could  compel  apjiearaiice  by  a  clerk  by  disn 

The  Jew,  altboiijih  a  fne  man  to  all  the  worM  ' 
was  practically  the  latter's  serf.     All  lie  had  wa^ 
I  hose  lo  demand  il.     The  Jews  do  not  figure 
indeeil,  ilieir  afl':iirs  bui  rarely  came  before  lln 
wa-;  a  siieiial  irilmnal,  the  Exchequer  of  the  J. 
terriiiiied  disputes    twlween  Jew  and  Christ'.- 
have  aimed  at  and  aapiired  a  competence. 
ume,  in  all  causes,  whether  civil  or  criminal. 
caied,  unless  it  was  some  merely  civil  cai. 
wbii  h  could  be  left  lo  a  purely  Jewish  triV' 
(he  King  was  content  that  Jewish  law  shot., 
judges.  "   - 

The  leper  too  deserves  a  few  words, 
he  make  a  gift  or  enter  into  a  contract.     .\ 
was  passed  over  and  could  not  inheiii. 
propeny  was  his  before  his  segregation  . 
tion  of  lunatics  and  idiots  we  know  lilt 
and  we  are  not  concerned  with  Aem  i 
Nothing  hM  bcce  wid  w  fcr  of 


)N.  XXV 

.    It  from  the  other  jurisdiction 

-;irily   by  all   such  courts   under 

.     law  of  the   King's  court,   were 

_iant  from  the  Crown,  was,  so  far  as 

iiL<l,  purely  civil  in  character.     Over 

:   would  be  more  ample.     About  the 

it  would  be  able  to  say  the  last  word. 

:  custom,  and  inflict  minor  punishments 

.I-  jurisdiction  when  it  was  enjoyed  was  of 

nist  franchise  was  the  view  of  frankpledge, 

;   jurisdiction   connected   with  it.      It   was 

;  s  jurisdiction  in  his  tourn.     As  the  sheriff 

.".  his  hundreds  to  see  that  the  people  were  in 

.ill  cases,  so  the  lord  who  had  a  view  of  frank- 

:  '.vice  a  year  for  the  like  purpose.    The  advantage 

!  this  franchise  gave  the  lord  was  the  exclusion  of 

.  [fc-rence  in  matters  of  frankpledge,  and  the  profit 

:  .c  jurisdiction   in  matters  within   his  own   manor. 

:here  were,  such  as  infangenethef,  the  right  to  hang 

ivith  the  theft  upon  him  within  the  manor,  and  utfan- 

i^lu  to  hang  him  wherever  caught;  the  assize  of  beer 

;t  is,  the  ix)wer  of  enforcing  within  his  own  territory  the 

i.ccs  which  from  time  to  time  fixed  the  prices  at  which 

-  were  to  be  sold.     Still  higher  franchises  were  possessed  by 

.:!  lords,  such  as  the  right  to  take  the  amercements  of  his 

it'  inflicted  by  the  royal  courts,  to  have  the  chattels  of  his  felons 

ivfs  which  would  ordinarily  belong  to  the  King,  and  even  to 

man  after  the  King's  justices  had  sentenced  him,  the  "  return  of 

within  his  territory,  that  is,  to  do  the  work  which  the  sheriff*  would 

.'.isc  have  had  to  do  in  executing  the  King's  precept.     Some  lords 

liicir  own  coroners — the  King's  coroners,  we  are  told,  do  not 

■r  the  hundred  of  Taunton  (No.  1076) — and  some  had  jurisdiction 

■  the   exclusion  of  the  King's  courts.*      Others,   like  the   Prior  of 

i  'unstable,  "compel  the  King's  justices  in  eyre  to  come  and  sit  within 

':icir  precincts,  and  even  to  occupy  a  secondary  position  when  they 

uei  there."*     The  Abbot  of  Athelney  excluded   the   King's   bailiffs. 

He  was  in  the  wrong,  however,  and  his  franchise  was  taken  into  the 

King's  hand  (No.  164).     Of  the  fiscal  immunities  and  privileges  which 

some  of  the  lords  possessed  it  is  not  necessary  here  to  speak.     But 

these  higher  franchises  were  not  the  privilege  of  the  person  whom 

we  usually  recognise  under  the  style  of  a  "  lord  of  the  manor."    They 

See  the  case  of  the  Abbot  of  Glaston  referred  to  in  the  Introil.  to  Roll  756,  itifra, 
"  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  I,  p.  571.       See  also  Prof.  Maitlaml's  Introtl.  10 
"Select  Pleas  in  Manorial  Courts*'  (Seld.  Soc.),  p.  xxv. 

d 


XX  vi  INTRODUCTION. 


were  for  the  lord  of  an  honour,  or  of  a  barony.  For  as  the  lord  of 
the  manor  had  a  court  for  his  tenants,  so  the  overlord,  perhaps  the 
owner  of  many  manors,  had  his  court,  to  which  his  tenants  had  to 
do  suit.  As  the  free  tenant  of  the  manor  owed  suit  to  the  court  of 
the  manor,  so  the  lord  of  the  latter  owed  suit  to  his  superior  in  the 
court  of  his  honour. ^  The  suit  of  court  was  an  important  matter  in 
the  1 3th  century.  In  Somerset,  Richard  de  Oilly  has  a  grant  of  land 
from  the  ancestors  of  Sabina  del  Ortay.  Years  afterwards  there  is 
a  suit  because  William,  Richard's  son,  refuses  or  neglects  his  suit  to 
Sabina's  court.  In  the  end  there  is  a  compromise.  Sabina  releases 
William's  suit  in  every  three  weeks,  but  the  latter  must  attend  when  the 
King's  writ  comes,  or  there  is  a  thief  to  be  judged  (see  No.  602). 
Something  more  will  have  to  be  said  about  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
seignoral  courts  in  dealing  with  the  scope  of  the  authority  of  the  justices 
of  the  King. 

The  question  may  now  be  asked  who  were  the  judges  in  the  manor 
courts.  Many  years  later  it  would  be  said  that  besides  the  leet  there 
must  be  two  courts  in  a  manor,  a  court  baron  and  the  customary  court. 
That  the  former  was  the  court  of  the  freehold  tenants  of  the  manor,  and 
they  were  the  judges  therein,  that  the  customary  court  was  for  the 
villeins,  and  there  the  lord's  steward  was  the  judge.  Further,  it  would 
be  said  that  if  the  freeholders  became  reduced  in  number  below  two, 
there  could  be  no  court  baron  for  lack  of  suitors,  and  no  court  baron 
means  no  manor.  There  is  much  doubt  and  obscurity  about  this 
doctrine.  It  is  not  necessary  to  enlarge  upon  it  here.  Suffice  it  to  say, 
that  even  in  the  time  of  Elizabeth  it  was  questioned  whether  it  was  true 
to  say  that  the  judge  of  the  customary  court  was  the  steward. 

In  the  13th  century,  as  far  as  we  can  see,  there  was  but  one  court  for 
freeholders  and  villeins  alike.  "  The  original  court  of  the  manor  was 
one  and  the  body  of  its  suitors  was  one.  The  distinction  between 
courts  for  free  tenants  and  customary  courts  grows  up  very  gradually  in 
the  14th  century  and  later."'  Who  found  the  judgments?  Must  free- 
holders form  part  of  the  assembly  which  judged  the  villeins  ?  or  were 
the  villeins  entitled  to  be  judged  solely  by  their  class  ?  There  is  nothing 
to  show  that  a  lord's  jurisdiction  over  his  villeins  depended  in  any 
way  on  the  existence  of  free  suitors.  Many  west  country  manors 
had  but  very  few  freehold  tenants.  Could  they  pronounce  judg- 
ments by  themselves?  If  a  lord  had  franchise  of  gallows,  it  was  for 
the  freeholders  alone  to  pronounce  the  doom.  A  man  could  not  be 
hanged  but  by  their  judgment.  Then  it  would  seem  that  the  number 
of  suitors  necessary  to  decide  his  fate  was  not  fixed.     Probably  this  was 

'  SeeStubbs,  •'Const.  Hist.,"  i,  Chap,  xi,  quoting  2  Scrivcn  on  copyhohls,  737, 
Vinogradoff,  **  Villainage  in  England,"  pp.  390-1. 
•  Vinogradoff,  p.  396. 


INTRODUCTION.  xxvii 


so,  and  probably,  although  there  was  but  one  court  and  one  body  of 
suitors,  the  two  classes  of  suitors,  free  and  unfree,  of  which  that  body 
was  composed,  now  and  then  fell  apart  and  acted  by  themselves  or  by 
suitors  selected  from  themselves.  In  course  of  time  the  original 
position  of  the  suitors  as  assessors  of  the  court  was  modified  by  the 
introduction  of  the  system  of  presentment  by  jurors.  The  procedure 
of  manorial  courts  was  affected  by  the  growth  of  the  jury  system  :  that 
as  the  King's  courts  developed  the  inquest,  so  the  practice  was  imitated 
by  the  lords,  who  derived  a  profit  from  the  fees  paid  for  inquests.  The 
presenting  jury  was  equally  a  subject  of  imitation.*  But  if  the  free- 
holders declined  to  swear,  the  lord  could  not  compel  them.  It  was 
otherwise  with  his  villeins,  over  whom  he  was  supreme.  Thus  perhaps 
came  the  division  in  the  manorial  court. 

The  competence  of  these  courts  was  very  varied.  They  entertained 
personal  actions,  at  least  when  the  amount  at  stake  was  less  than  40X., 
in  particular  actions  of  debt,  detinue,  trespass  and  covenant.  They 
gave  damages  for  libel  and  slander,  and  possibly  they  enforced  agree- 
ments not  under  seal,  which  the  King's  court  would  have  disregarded.' 
Where  freehold  land  was  concerned,  a  proprietary  action  must  have 
been  brought  in  the  court  of  the  lord  of  whom  it  was  held.  The  "  writ 
of  right "  was  the  process.  The  action  once  begun  was  easily  removed 
first  into  the  county  court  and  then  into  the  King's  court  In  all 
matters  which  concerned  customary  land  the  lord's  court  was  the  only 
possible  tribunal.  Then  there  was  the  police  jurisdiction,  the  present- 
ment of  offences  whether  the  lord  had  the  franchise  or  not.  "  It  is 
difificult  to  prevent  a  lord  from  making  his  feudal  court  a  police  court " 
If  the  court  of  a  lord  failed  to  do  justice,  the  case  could  be  removed  to 
the  county  court,  and  thence  to  the  King's  courts.  None  but  the  latter 
could  hear  a  charge  of  false  judgment,'  and  in  such  cases  four  free 
suitors  of  the  manor  had  to  bear  the  record  to  the  superior  court,  and 
hear  its  judgment.*  In  a  case  of  difficulty,  a  lord  might  himself  adjourn 
the  suit  to  the  King's  court  for  its  advice  and  assent.*  Except  in  the 
anomalous  case  of  ancient  demesne,  a  lord  could  not  be  sued  in  his  own 
court. 

I  pass  over  the  municipal  courts,  the  court  of  the  borough,  or  of  a 
ward,  or  a  leet  in  the  borough.*    They  concern  us  but  little  as  we  read 

*  This   is  Prof.  Maitland's  view.     Sec   Introd.  to  "Select   Picas   in    Manorial 
CoBits."     Dr.  Vinogradoff  agrees,  see  **  Villainage  in  England,"  p.  371. 

«  "  Hist.  English  Law."  Vol.  I,  p.  574,  575. 

*  Sec  Provisions  of  Westminster,  No.  16.  Stubbs,  "  Select  Charters,"  p.  404,  and 
the  St.  of  Marlborough,  c.  20. 

*  See  Bract,  Note  Book,  pi.  824,  834  for  examples.  *  Glanv.,  Bk.  8,  c.  11. 

*  Those  who  are  interested  in  the  l^al  position  of  the  borough,  should  consult  Mr. 
Pike's  Introduction  to  the  "  Year  Books  of  Edward  III  "  (first  jxirt),  Rolls  Series, 
wherein  he  deals  with  the  case  of  the  borough  of  Wells. 


:\TROl>UCTION. 

y  .v.>:v.    .1  .;i.s  >xi^.  Qor  is  any  attempt  made  to  define  a 

-,  -...t    !i  :■!«  i_;th  century  a  definition  would  not  have 

^- ■.,        -s.  .ii  ,>t  tL'*nship  had  no  court.     The  court  which 

„     .    -s..^!.    .'I   'Vfc  wa>,  for  the  most  part,  the  court  of  the  manor. 

-    .    tuiti^vr  of  townships  for  the  purpose  of  judicial 

,  ■  ■■    .    >...v,-.    x.\\   defence  formed   whnl   is    known   as    the 

1     ■   I    ■•i,'  .i>:;dred  were  liberties  or  franchises  in  which 

>,  '  >.i>    it    ;.'r;vj[c   hands.      The    hundred  was    also    an 

-.    .     1.    v>e-k      ^Icv^raphically  it   underwent  change.      In 

i,i.iii'.c.>i.*i!te  hundreds  became  amalgamated  with  others 

..11       .     i   *.i;'ii      Other  hundre<is  came  into  existence.     The 

.     ■»••■.■. iv.       '.'ii.'l>alily  the  changes  were   influenced  by  pro- 

,  ■.*  .lu:  .  X"  »itui:g!u  for  private  jurisiiiction.     The  owner  of 

,■,.    1,1,;  .uio  rn  anirther,  the  tenants  of  which  he  compelled  to 

•i  ,<■,.. I.  oi  rhe  tormcr.'     Such  a  proceeding  may  or  may  not 

...  <...  .i,>.t,-\!  [•%  n-yal  charter.     Su  the  outlying  land  came  to 

,,     ..    ::.'.  oi  the  hundred  to  which  the  court  belonged.     In 

.     ....>,  -.'viiH  y'i  Staffordshire,  one  Geoffrj-  (.Irjffyn,  was  charged 

^  .J,  i  1.     .'1:1  of  one  hundred  to  put  it  inio  another  which  he 

..  vi        V'.-m  Ji'ivndiittothis  Intrrxluction  I  have  given  a  table 

.  ..    .;t.,i'.Lio  t\>  siunc  extent  such  developments. 

>..,>siivAi  Iwd  a  t'ourt  which,  in  the  13th  century,  met  every 
.,.x.  U  ^vms  III  have  been  supplied  with  suitors  in  the  same 
I,  i,'.iiin  l^^uH  was.  It  was  a  court  for  civil,  that  is,  non- 
..  .,■. .  t.iu,  Hiilikf  the  county  court,  it  did  not  hold  pleas  of 
-1,,.^-  uiioii'«  whiih  came  before  i[  were  chiefly  actions  of  debt 
..  .1,.  U  *Uv>  not  si-em  to  have  been  in  any  accurate  sense 
,.  ;.v  ,i'milv  i-i'Urt,  that  is  to  say,  no  appeal  or  complaint  for 
',  •.'.(i>t-  t'ould  be  taken  from  one  to  the  other,  nor  do  we  find 
..:i.  «ou'  \-\rn  iniiismitted  to  il  by  the  King's  court. 
.  it.iiidu'd  iitutts  were  in  private  hands.  The  hundred  of 
.11  ».»,  .1  ».iM-  in  point,  and  abt)ut  1255  we  find  the  right  to  the 
.{•in.tlU'lixf  Henry  delJracton  himself  (see  No.  1491).  When 
,.  \U<>  |vi-.on,»l  ownership,  it  did  not  necessarily  mean  that  there 
),,i>liiii.d  iiiiht  or  any  right  to  anything  beyond  the  profits  of 
\  Uhi'U'  (he  (durt  was  in  private  hands,  the  lord's  steward 
I,  III  \i\iw\  «MM'N  the  sheriff  was  the  normal  president,  hut  as  at 
,■  \\»\\\i   lonsidfration'  he  had  generally  let  the  court  to  farm 

1.1    \:i<^h-\i  l-iw,"  Viil.  11,11.  518,  where  Ihe  existence  of  "islamU"  of  a 


INTRODUCTION.  XXIX 


to  his  bailiff,  the  latter  usually  presided  The  suitors,  freeholders  of 
the  hundred,  made  the  judgments.  The  court  represented  the  hundred, 
as  the  county  court  represented  the  shire.  If  the  court  gave  a  false 
judgment,  the  hundred  had  to  pay  for  it.  The  hundred  could  be  fined 
for  neglect  of  duty,  as  will  be  shown  presently  in  discussing  the  "  murder" 
fine. 

Twice  a  year  the  sheriff  visited  every  hundred  of  his  county,  every 
hundred,  that  is,  that  was  not  in  private  hands.  This  was  the  "  sheriff's 
toum."  His  purpose  was  first  to  see  that  every  one  who  ought  to  be, 
was  in  tithing,  "the  view  or  frankpledge,"  and  secondly,  to  receive 
presentments  of  offences.  On  these  occasions  he  presided  in  person 
and  acted  much  as  a  county  magistrate  does  in  these  days.  Minor 
offences  presented  before  him  were  dealt  with  summarily;  presentments 
of  felony  were  received,  so  that  steps  might  be  taken  to  have  the 
offenders  before  the  King's  justices  on  their  next  coming.  The  ordinary 
suitors  then  took  no  pare  in  judging.  The  attendance  at  the  toum  was 
larger  than  at  other  meetings  of  the  hundred.  The  chief  pledges,  the 
heads  of  their  tithings,  "  the  tithing  men,"  had  to  be  there  and  four  men 
and  the  reeve  from  every  township.  These  would  be  unfree  men  as  a 
rule.  Besides  them  there  were  the  freeholders  for  a  jury  if  such  was 
wanted.  A  little  later  than  the  time  of  this  book  (52  Hen.  iij)  the 
Statute  of  Marlborough  provided  that  no  one  above  the  rank  of  a  knight, 
no  ''religious"  man,  and  no  woman  need  attend  the  toum  unless 
specially  summoned.  This  statute  was  a  re-enactment  of  the  Provisions 
of  Westminster  (No.  4),  a.d.  1259,  based  on  the  Provisions  of  Oxford.* 
The  sheriff  submitted  the  "  articles  of  the  view,"  the  questions  to  be 
answered,  as  the  King's  justices  submitted  the  articles  of  the  eyre.  The 
representatives  of  the  vills  or  tithings  in  answer  to  these  articles  made 
presentments,  which  were  put  before  the  jury  of  twelve  freeholders,  who 
had  power  to  reject  them  or  to  supply  omissions.  Upon  the  present- 
ments thus  endorsed  the  sheriff  took  action,  issuing  orders  for  the  arrest 
of  those  charged  with  felony,  and  declaring  those  charged  with  pettier 
misdeeds  to  be  in  the  King's  mercy.  The  amercements  were  "  affeered  " 
or  fixed  by  two  or  more  of  the  suitors  sworn  to  do  the  work  justly. 

This  is  an  appropriate  place  to  speak  of  the  system  of  frankpledge, 
although  only  the  duty  of  its  supervision  concerned  the  hundred.  The 
theory  was  that  every  man,  free  or  unfree,  above  the  age  of  12,  should 
be  in  tithing,'  so  that  he  should  have  pledges  for  good  conduct  and 
keeping  the  peace.  This  was  the  broad  mle,  to  which  there  were  excep- 
tions. Some  men  might  have  that  which  was  a  sufficient  security  in 
itself,  land  or  rank.     Others  were  in  the  household  or  mainpast  of  some 


*  See  Slubbs,  **  Select  Charters,'*  p.  402. 
'  Lract.,  fu.  124b. 


XXX  INTRODUCTION. 


man.  In  that  case  the  head  of  the  house  was  responsible  for  them. 
The  prior  of  la  Houme  did  not  produce  two  of  his  lay  brothers,  and 
suffered  accordingly  (No.  780) ;  William,  son  of  William  de  Pole,  was  of 
the  mainpast  of  his  father,  who  is  therefore  in  mercy  (No.  846) ; 
Nicholas  Copin  was  of  the  mainpast  of  Robert  Tresor  in  Cheleworth, 
therefore  Robert  is  amerced  (No.  924);  Robert  de  Aula  fled,  he  was  of 
the  mainpast  of  Isabella  de  Cheseburford,  in  Dorset,  therefore  she  is 
amerced  for  his  flight  (No.  940) ;  William  de  Glenvill  and  Malgerin 
were  outlawed,  they  were  of  the  mainpast  of  the  Archdeacon  of 
Taunton,  who,  being  dead,  could  not  be  amerced  (No.  981).  Many 
other  illustrations  are  to  be  found  in  these  rolls.  If  men  were  itinerant 
from  place  to  place  they  were  not  in  tithing.  Custom  of  the  country 
had  much  to  say  in  these  matters.  Some  counties,  Westmoreland 
and  Shropshire  for  example,  had  no  frankpledge.  In  Somerset  it  did 
not  obtain  in  the  burgh  of  Ilchester  (No.  372).  In  Hertfordshire  the 
householder  was  not  responsible  for  a  member  of  his  household  unless 
the  latter  should  return  to  him  after  committing  a  felony,  or  unless  he 
harboured  the  offender  after  his  crime.*  Those  who  were  required  to 
be  in  frankpledge  were  the  villeins  only.  In  the  rolls  before  us  we 
constantly  find  "  so  and  so  was  not  in  tithing,  quia  liber^"^  The  tithing 
was  responsible  for  its  man.  If  he,  being  accused  of  some  crime,  was 
not  produced  before  the  justices,  the  tithing  was  amerced.  If  it  was 
shown  that  he  was  not  in  tithing  when  he  ought  to  have  been,  the  town- 
ship was  amerced.  Here  it  should  be  observed  that  the  word  "  tithing" 
in  this  connection  has  no  territorial  significance.  It  means  the  group  of 
persons  or  pledges  to  which  the  accused  belonged.  For  such  a  group 
there  might  stand  a  whole  township  or  district,  where  the  tithing  man 
would  be  the  tithing  man  of  the  place.  This  was  the  common  system 
in  the  west  of  England.  In  these  rolls  we  find,  for  example,  the  tithing 
of  Melles  "  (No.  1024),  "  the  tithing  of  Clatewurthy  "  (No.  j  100),  "the 
tithing  of  Little  Baggebergh  "  (No.  iioi),  "the  tithing  of  Dunyete  " 
(No.  1 1 78),  **the  tithing  of  West  Hache,"  and  "the  tithing  of  Hache 
Beauchampe"  (No.  1184),  and  others.  But  we  also  find  there  the 
system  of  groups  of  persons  presided  over  by  a  chief  pledge,  tithing  man, 
or  head  borough.  For  example,  in  the  hundred  of  Yatton  we  hear  of 
**  the  tithing  of  William  the  tithing  man  of  la  Wyk  "  (No.  755),  we  hear 
of  "  the  tithing  of  Adam  Cromer  of  Cheddar  "  (No.  788),  "  the  tithing  of 
Richard  Kippinge  in  Dultingcote"  (No.  823),  "the  tithing  of  Richard 
the  tithing  man  of  Eston  "  (No.  873),  "  the  tithing  of  Gilbert  the  tithing 
man  of  Bristilton  "  (No.  924),  "the  frankpledge  of  Ralph  de  Gatekumb 
and  William  le  Thayn "  (No.  933),  "  the  tithing  of  Robert  Pile  in 
Hardington"  (No.  979),  "  the  tithing  of  Philip  Godman  of  Kinmersdon  '* 

>  Bract.,  fo.  124b.  See  e,g,  Nus.  846,  899,  981. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXI 


(No.  991),  "the  tithing  of  Robert  Bithewod"  (No.  1077),  "the  tithing 
of  Wfidter  Wlwin  "  (No.  1086),  and  many  others.  In  the  one  case  the 
township  discharged  its  duty  of  having  all  members  in  frankpledge  and 
tithing  by  being  itself  a  tithing  and  frankpledge.  In  the  others  it 
watched  that  the  people  resident  within  it  and  who  ought  to  be  in 
tithing  were  duly  associated  in  groups.  To  ascertain  whether  this 
duty  had  been  effectually  performed  was  part  of  the  sheriff's  duty  at  his 
toum. 

Just  as  the  "  hundred "  was  a  body  of  men,  or  court,  so  was  the 
**  county."  Not  once  in  these  rolls  do  we  meet  with  the  expression 
curia  comitatus  or  curia  de  comitatu.  Where  we  find  comitatus,  we  know 
that  the  county  court  is  meant,  the  whole  comunitas  of  the  shire.  From 
the  earliest  times,  and  down  to  the  reign  of  Edward  I,  if  not  later,  the 
county  court  was  the  folkmoot  or  general  assembly  of  the  people,  at 
which  was  transacted  the  business,  judicial,  financial,  and  military,  of 
the  shire.  In  the  time  of  Henry  III  the  court  was  held  every  month, 
and  twice  a  year  there  was  a  fuller  and  more  important  assemblage. 
How  it  was  constituted  is  a  difficult  question.  Commonly  it  is  said 
that  all  freeholders  should  attend,  together  with  the  reeve  and  four  men 
from  every  vill,  but  this  statement  is  too  general.  Suit  of  court  was 
not  regarded  as  a  privilege,  far  from  it.  It  was  a  duty,  and  one  of 
a  very  onerous  character.  There  were  many  liberties,  chartered  and 
prescriptive,  which  enjoyed  immunity  from  such  suit,  and  individuals 
occasionally  obtained  exemption  by  the  King's  charter.  In  No.  1 5 1 1 
we  have  an  instance  of  exemption  from  service  as  a  juror  or  recognitor. 
Is  it  conceivable  that  every  small  freeholder  in  the  outlying  districts 
of  a  large  county  like  Somerset,  made  a  journey,  perhaps  on  foot, 
across  the  county  every  month  in  the  year,  besides  the  duty  of  attending 
the  court  of  his  hundred  every  three  weeks,  and  that  of  his  manor, 
as  often  P^ 

Moreover,  suit  was  divisible.  A  given  piece  of  land  owed  suit,  that 
is  its  tenant  was  bound  to  attend  the  court.  In  process  of  time  it 
became  divided  aroongsc  other  tenants.  Still  one  suit  only  was  done 
for  the  whole.  Probably  therefore  the  tenants  arranged  between 
themselves  who  should  do  it.  Again,  suit  could  be  discharged  by 
attorney  or  deputy.  No.  1 280  in  this  volume  refers  to  such  an  attorney. 
This  was  conceded  by  the  Statute  of  Merton  in  1236,  but  it  was  not 
then  a  new  departure.  For  long  time  before  great  men  had  enjoyed 
the  privilege.  Of  the  representative's  of  the  vill  **we  read  nothing 
in  documents  later  than  the  Leges  Henrici^''^  nor  even  there  does 
their  attendance  appear  to  be  normal.  If  neither  the  lord  nor  his 
steward  can  attend,  then  the  reeve,  priest  and  four  men  may  appear 

>  See ««  Hist.  English  Law,"  i,  523.  "  Hist.  Eng.  Law,"  i,  p.  534. 


XXXII  INTRODUCTION. 


and  acquit  the  vill  of  its  suit  J  But  at  the  time  under 
they  must  go  to  the  county  court  if  they  have  a  crime  to  present, 
I'he  president  of  the  court  was  the  sheniT,  but  he  was  inrompfflent 
to  make  judgment.  No  doubt  his  position  often  tempted  him  to 
influence  a  decision.  We  have  an  example  in  this  book  (Xa  2931. 
The  suitors  or  some  of  them  were  the  judges,  the  doomsmen.  It  was 
not  necessary  that  they  should  be  unanimous,  but  where  there  was  a 
difference  of  opinion,  it  seems  that  the  sheriff  took  the  judgment  of 
the  better  and  wiser  men.  In  this  way  too  he  was  not  witbom 
influence.  We  may  well  suppose  that  the  ordinary  business  of  the 
court  was  usually  transacted  by  a  small  group  of  active  and  business- 
loving  people.  Of  such  a  group  we  see  something  further  on»  when 
wc  consider  the  proceedings  ui)on  an  eyre,  a  group  bearing  the  strange 
name  busones  or  buzones. 

With  the  sheriff  sat  the  coroners,'  the  custodes  piadtomm  cnram 
or  coronatoreSy  for  the  terms  arc  interchangeable,  as  the  rolls  show. 
'I'hey  were  elected  oflfurcrs,  knights,  of  the  county.  They  held  inquests 
on  bodies  of  persons  slain  by  violence  or  accident,  received  declarations 
of  approvers,  heard  ordinary  appeals  up  to  the  final  trial,  which  was 
reserved  for  the  justices,  they  kept  record  of  exigents  and  outlawries, 
and  received  the  confessions  and  abjurations  of  felons  who  had  taken 
simctuary.  They  imjuircd  after  treasure  trove,  they  appraised  and 
guarded  wreckage,  and  soinctinies  on  the  direction  of  the  King 
I>erformed  duties  which  would  otherwise  have  been  discharged  by 
the  sheriff.  Indeed,  throughout  the  13th  century  they  acted  as  a 
check  on  the  latter.* 

Of  the  judicial  business  of  the  court  there  is  not  much  to  say. 
Seemingly  its  jurisdiction  in  actions  for  land  had  become  of  little 
imiM)rtanre  in  ti)e  13th  century.  It  occupied  an  intermediate  position 
between  the  feudal  courts  and  the  Kind's  courts.  It  was  the  channel 
through  which  ))r(x  codings  Irttin  the  fornKT  went  to  the  latter,  and 
he  who  brought  his  case  thuN  far,  intended  to  carry  it  further.  In 
personal  actions  its  competence  was  limited  to  40J.  The  criminal 
jurisdiction  had  ceasctl  to  he  ol  :iny  iui)u)rtance  ;  the  royal  courts  had 
absorbed  it.  Hy  the  Assi/e  ol  ( 'Kifcnclo?\  ( \.i).  1 166)  it  was  provided 
that  when  anyone  was  a*  ( used  hcloie  the  sheriff  of  being  ^^robator  vel 
murdnUor  fv/  Iiitro  fv*/  n\t'/*tot  totNttt"  he  should  he  remitted  to  the 
justices.  The  ulhailide  ol  the  Anm/c  of  Northam]>ton  (a.i>.  1176) 
seems  to  im)ily  that  the    Knig'i  justices  were  to  try  prisoners  accused 

*  J.e^i  litt*nii  Pn»ti^  \ii,  7.     SniMi-,,  •'Silivl  < 'liaili-ts/*  n.  105. 


*  Sec  **  Select  i'lwilriii,'*  |i.  jfij. 

*  The  latest  learnini^  on  thr  Mitiin-i  I1  in  |t.<  i.Miml  in  t)u<  treatise  by  Dr.  Gross, 
**  Select  Cases  from  the  Coumeih'  Udlli, "  (.s,-i,|,  .s.h-.). 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXlil 


of  all  serious  offences,  except  ^^  minutis  furtis  et  roheriis  que  facta  fuerunt 
tempore  guerre  sicut  de  equis  et  bobus  et  minoribus  rebus. ^^  Again,  the 
24th  article  of  Magna  Charta  prescribed  that  "  nullus  vicecomes 
amstabularius  coronatores  vel  alii  ballivi  nostri  teneant  placita  corone 
nostre^  "What  X\\q  ^^ placita  corone ^^  meant  in  1215  it  is  impossible 
to  say  precisely.  They  must  at  least  have  meant  serious  crimes,  and 
this  enactment  cannot  have  had  a  less  effect  than  that  of  depriving  the 
sheriff^s  court  of  all  criminal  jurisdiction  of  importance.^  Cognizance 
of  small  matters  such  as  medleys  and  blows  not  involving  the  King's 
peace  or  felony  it  still  had.^  Still  it  had  something  to  do,  as  these  rolls 
show,  in  the  initial  stages  of  the  criminal  business  that  was  afterwards 
to  come  before  the  King's  justices.  The  "  appeal "  in  criminal  cases 
was  commenced  in  this  court,  without  any  writ  being  necessary.^  It 
also  held  inquests,  as  we  also  see,  when  directed  by  the  King's  writ. 

One  jurisdiction,  and  most  important  it  was,  belonged  only  to  the 
county  court  and  the  folk-moot  of  London.  Even  the  King's  court 
did  not  possess  it.  The  latter  could  order  a  man  to  be  exacted,  to  be 
proclaimed  and  bidden  to  come  in  to  the  King's  peace,  but  the  county 
court  only  could  outlaw  him  if  he  failed  to  obey  the  summons.  This 
has  always  been  so.  John  Wilkes  was  outlawed  in  the  county  court  of 
Middlesex  in  1764,  having  been  ^^  quinto  exactus  at  the  *  Three  Tuns, 
in  Brook  Street,  near  Holborne."*  The  extent  to  which  resort  was 
made  to  the  process  of  outlawry  will  be  manifest  from  an  examination 
of  these  rolls.  For  one  man  hanged,  many  were  outlawed.  Let  us 
take  the  great  roll  of  a.d.  1242-3  (No.  756)  for  example.  We  find  that 
on  that  eyre  there  were  15  persons  hanged  to  upwards  of  100  actually 
ordered  to  be  outlawed  or  waived,  and  45  who  took  sanctuary  and 
abjured  the  realm.  This  is  a  large  proportion,  and  is  not  a  little 
suggestive  of  the  opportunities  which  a  criminal  had  of  escape.  On 
the  Gloucestershire  eyre  of  a.d.  1221  complaint  was  made  of  330  acts 
of  homicide.  One  man  was  mutilated  and  about  1 4  were  hanged,  while 
about  100  orders  for  outlawry  were  given.* 

Leaving  the  local  courts,  let  us  now  consider  the  administration  of 
justice  in  the  Royal  courts.  To  trace,  or  to  attempt  to  trace,  the 
gradual  evolution  of  the  courts  engaged  down  to  recent  times  in 
administering  the  common  law,  to  say  nothing  of  the  Court  of  Chancery, 
is  obviously  a  task  beyond  the  scope  of  this  Introduction,  and,  moreover, 
one  which   would   involve  the  discussion   of  matters  of  doubt  and 

*  Stephens,  "  Hist.  Crim.  Law,"  p.  83. 

*  Bract.,  fo.  154b. 

*  See  many  instances  in  **  Coroners*  Rolls  '*  (Seld.  Soc.). 

*  ••  Burrow's  Repts.,"  p.  2535-6. 

*  "  Hist  English  Law,"  Vol.  II,  p.  555.    "  Gloucestershire  Pleas  of  the  Crown," 
Maitland. 


XXXIV  INTRODUCTION. 


dispute  which  may  well  be  avoided  for  the  present.  It  will  be  sufficient 
to  give  a  general  survey  over  the  time  covered  by  this  volume. 

In  the  time  of  our  Norman  and  Angevin"  kings,  the  assemblage  of 
prelates  and  notable  men  about  the  person  of  the  King,  the  King's 
court,  was  the  centre  of  business  and  society.  It  contained  within 
itself  the  origins  of  all  the  great  institutions  of  our  present  system  of 
government.  Such  part  of  it  as  from  time  to  time  the  King  appointed 
for  the  purpose,  the  Curia  Regis  ad  Scaccarium,  controlled  the  financial 
affairs  of  the  realm.  Here  was  the  beginning  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer 
of  later  days.  Another  part  dispensed  justice,  again  under  the  King's 
direction  and  control.* 

In  early  days  the  King's  court  of  justice  was  very  much  what  he 
chose  to  make  it.  The  King  needed  no  statute  to  eflect  a  change  in 
its  constitution.  He  was  the  fountain  of  justice  in  himself,  he  often 
presided  in  person,  he  selected  his  assistants,  his  justices,  and  removed 
them  at  pleasure.  Henry  II  we  know  was  unusually  active  where  the 
administration  of  justice  was  concerned.  He  made  experiment  after 
experiment,  and  did  not  hesitate  to  give  effect  to  the  experience  he 
gained.  From  a.d.  it 78  we  hear  that  the  King  had  chosen  five  men, 
two  clerks  and  three  laymen,  who  were  not  to  depart  from  the  King's 
court,  but  were  to  hear  all  complaints  of  the  kingdom ;  questions  that 
they  could  not  decide  were  to  be  reserved  for  the  King  and  his  wise 
men.'  Here  we  have  the  making  of  a  central  and  permanent  court. 
It  was  the  capitalis  curia  Regis  of  Glanvill.  From  the  early  years  of  the 
same  King's  reign  itinerant  justices  had  made  their  circuits  through  the 
country,  and  the  court  they  held  was  also  curia  Regis,  but  not  capitalis 
atria  Regis.  We  do  not  know  for  certain  whether  the  justices  followed 
Henry  II  in  his  movements  through  the  country.  Probably  they  did, 
but  during  the  later  years  of  his  reign  he  was  but  seldom  in  England,  and 
then  only  for  short  visits.  His  successor  Richard  paid  but  two  visits  to 
this  country,  and  although  he  did  preside  in  person  while  here,  we  can 
scarcely  say  that  the  curia  Regis  shows  a  tendency  to  split  up  into  two 
courts.  It  was  otherwise  in  John's  reign.  That  King  was  frequently  on 
the  move  with  justices  in  his  train,  while  another  set  of  justices  sat  term 
after  term  at  Westminster  or  at  St.  Bride's,  in  London.  The  latter  were 
styled  the  justices  of  the  Bench,  and  the  court  so  constituted  came  to 
be  known,  in  time,  as  the  Common  Bench,  the  Common  Pleas  of  our 
time.  Parties  were  summoned  before  it  by  a  writ  directing  them  to 
appear  "before  our  justices  at  Westminster,"  whilst  litigants  whose 
disputes  were  to  be  decided  by  the  other  tribunal  were  to  appear 
"  before  us  wheresoever  we  shall  be  in  England." 

>  See  on  this  subject,  Madox,  "  Hist.  Exch.,"  Vol.  I,  pp.  2-6. 
•  **  Hist.  English  Law,"  Vol.  I,  p.  133,  quoting  Cesta  Hi 


Htnrici  11^  p.  207. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXV 


The  records  of  the  proceedings  at  Westminster  are  the  ^^pladta 
apud  IVestmonasterium  ;  "  of  those  before  the  King  are  ''^ placita  coram 
rege^  the  **  De  Banco  Rolls  "  and  **  Coram  Rege  Rolls  "  respectively. 
Cases  could  be  transferred  from  one  tribunal  to  another.  Professor 
Maitland  has  given  some  instances  gleaned  from  Madox  and  other 
sources.*  A.B.  owes  the  King  half  a  mark  for  removing  coram  rege 
a  case  quae  est  coram  justitiariis  de  Banco ;  the  King  greets  the 
justices  of  the  Bench,  and  bids  them  put  a  particular  case  coram  eo 
quia  illam  audire  vult ;  the  King  sends  the  record  of  a  case  to  the 
justices,  telling  them  that  it  was  to  have  been  heard  coram  domino 
Rege^  but  that  at  the  prayer  of  one  of  the  parties  it  is  put  before  the 
justices  in  I^ondon ;  the  King  tells  the  justices  at  Westminster  to 
excuse  A.B.  for  not  having  been  before  them  on  a  certain  day,  because 
on  that  day  he  was  coram  nt)bis  in  placito.  Again,  fines  were  levied 
before  the  justices  at  the  Bench  term  after  term,  and  before  the  King 
from  time  to  time  and  from  place  to  place.  Professor  Maitland  gives 
reasons*  for  the  statement  that  even  when  the  King  was  at  Westminster 
the  two  bodies  of  justices  did  not  necessarily  coalesce,  for  fines  of  even 
date  were  levied  at  Westminster  before  the  King  and  his  party  and 
before  the  justiciar  and  his  party.  Thus  we  see  that  although  in  John's 
reign  the  court  sometimes  assumed  a  dual  form,  that  it  could  be  in  two 
places  at  once,  and  that  two  forms  of  summons  were  in  use,  it  could 
not  be  said  that  there  were  yet  actually  two  courts.  Each  of  these 
divisions  was  competent,  as  we  see  from  the  plea  rolls,  to  do  all  manner 
of  business.  There  seems  to  have  been  no  difference  in  their 
jurisdiction.  When  the  King  left  the  country,  the  judges  who  had  been 
attending  him  joined  their  fellows  at  Westminster,  and  a  justice  when 
appointed  was  not  appointed  specially  to  either  division. 

This  division  of  the  King's  court  disappeared  during  the  piinority 
of  Henry  III.  So  long  as  he  was  an  infant  he  could  not  hear  pleas. 
The  justices  of  the  Bench  sat  regularly  in  London,  and  their  work  was 
supervised  by  the  Council  of  Regency,  which,  although  not  a  court  of 
law  in  the  ordinary  sense,  did  interfere  in  many  ways  in  judicial  matters. 

The  division  reappeared  when  the  King  became  of  full  age,  and 
began  to  do  justice  m  person,  and  from  about  1234  onwards  we  have 
two  distinct  courts,  each  with  its  own  set  of  rolls.  The  justices  of  the 
Bench  sit  at  Westminster  and  record  their  proceedings  in  the  "  De 
Banco  Rolls,"  the  others  follow  the  King,  and  their  records  are  the 
**  Coram  Rege  Rolls."  Differences  in  jurisdiction  now  show  themselves. 
The  court  held  before  the  King  can  supervise  and  correct  the  decisions 
of  the  Bench.*  Asjain,  the  provision  in  the  Great  Charter  that 
common  pleas,"  civil  suits  between  private  parties,  should  no  longer 

*  Introd.  to  **  Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown,"  p.  xiv.  '  Ibid.^  p.  xv. 

'  Bract.,  Note  Book,  pi.  ;i66,  1190. 


it 


\ 


XXXvi  INTRODUCTION. 


folloir  the  King,  had  created  a  special  jurisdictioo.  In  (act  the  pro- 
vision of  the  Charter  was  used  as  a  plea  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  coiut.^ 

Common  pleas  no  longer  were  heard  coram  rege^  they  were  the 
peculiar  province  of  the  Bench  at  Westmmster,  and  of  such  of  die 
itinerant  justices  as  by  their  commissions  were  authorised  to  take  them. 
Both  courts  still  continued  to  hear  pleas  of  the  Crown  or  criminal 
business  at  least  during  the  minority  of  the  King.  Thus  the  deavage 
which  existed  in  the  time  of  John  becomes  deeper  in  the  reign  of  his 
son.  Perhaps  we  cannot  say  that  the  two  courts  became  entirely 
distinct  until  each  had  its  own  chief  justice.  That  time  is  not  far  off, 
although  the  precise  date  is  not  ascertained,  the  beginning  of  the  reign 
of  Edward  I  found  the  separation  of  the  courts  complete.  During  the 
time  covered  by  this  book  the  court  "  before  the  King  himself "  was 
variable  in  its  constitution ;  ordinarily  it  would  consist  of  a  few 
professional  judges,  but  at  times  the  King  would  be  present  in  person 
with  a  gathering  of  his  great  officers  and  notables.  By  the  time  of 
Edward  I  the  term  "  King's  Bench "  is  given  to  the  body  of 
professional  judges,  and  a  new  set  of  records,  the  Parliament  Rolls, 
comes  in,  whereon  are  recorded  the  proceedings  of  the  King  and 
his  council,  of  the  larger  gathering  of  the  old  *'  court  of  the  King 
before  the  King  himself." 

It  is  interesting  to  remember,  indeed  it  should  not  be  forgotten  in 
the  consideration  of  this  subject,  that  the  strict  title  of  the  justices  of 
the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  which  was  destroyed  by  the  fusion  effected 
under  the  Judicature  Acts  of  recent  times,  was  '*  the  justices  of  the 
Bench,"  and  the  justices  of  the  Court  of  Queen's  Bench  were  "  the 
justices  assigned  to  hold  pleas  before  the  Queen  hersdf."  From  a 
historical  point  of  view  the  Judicature  Act  of  1873  w5ls  a  retrograde 
step.  "In  1875  the  Judicature  Act  of  1873  was  brought  into 
operation,  and  the  Courts  of  Common  Law  and  of  Equity,  all  of 
which  h^d  been  originally  derived  from  the  Curia  Regis,  or  the  powers 
of  one  of  its  members,  the  Lord  Chancellor,  weie  reunited  under  the 
name  of  the  High  Court  of  Judicature.  The  Court  of  Queen's  Bench 
thereupon  lost  its  ancient  title,  which  however  survives  in  the  name  of 
the  Queen's  Bench  Division,  and  its  Chief  Justice  became  the  Lord 
Chief  Justice  of  England,  a  title  which  almost  literally  reproduces  that 
which  was  borne  by  Lucy,  Glanvill,  and  De  Burgh.  The  High  Court  of 
Judicature,  and  more  particularly  the  Queen's  Bench  Division  of  the 
court,  is  thus  the  representative  of  the  Curia  Regis  in  the  capacity  of  a 
court  of  criminal  justice.'^* 


*  Bract.,  Note  Book,  pi.  1213.  1220. 

'  **  Hist,  of  Criminal  Law,"  Vol.  I,  p.  94.  Sir  J.  Fitzjames  Stephen  by  a  slip 
uses  the  term  *'  High  Courtof  Judical uie."  It  should  be  "  Supreme  Court  of  Judica- 
ture," not  to  be  confounded  with  the  "  High  Court  of  Justice." 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXVll 


It  could  not  be  supposed  that  a  King,  however  industrious,  could 
possibly  do  all  the  justice  which  the  exercise  of  his  prerogative  as  the 
supreme  authority  would  require  from  him,  even  with  the  assistance  of 
a  central  tribunal  such  as  the  Bench,  unless  he  delegated  his  authority 
from  time  to  time  to  justices  or  commissioners,  who  would  travel 
from  county  to  county  trying  criminals  and  disposing  of  civil  business 
on  the  spot  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  county  court  had  not 
jurisdiction  over  all  manner  of  crimes.  From  very  early  times  the  King 
reserved  to  himself  for  his  own  administration  and  profit  many  criminal 
picas.  Others  less  important  were  determined  by  the  local  courts.* 
Glanvill  said,*  in  the  days  of  Henry  II,  ^^  Fladtorum  aliud  est  criminahy 
aliud  civile.  Item^placitorum  criminalium  aliud  pertinet  ad  coronam 
damini  Regis,  aliud  ad  Vicecamites  prcvinciarum'^  The  crime  of  theft, 
although  punishable  by  death  or  mutilation,  belonged  to  the  sheriffs, 
and  to  them  also  appertained  to  take  cognizance  of  frays,  strokes  and 
wounds,  ^*'  pro  de/ectu  dominorum^' — which  Sir  J.  Fitzjames  Stephen 
interprets  to  mean,  where  there  was  no  franchise^ — unless  the  accuser 
laid  the  offence  to  be  against  the  King's  peace.  Practically  all  else  was 
in  the  province  only  of  the  King's  justices.  Obviously  then  there 
must  have  been  work  for  many  royal  commissioners  throughout 
England.  Accordingly  we  find  that  from  very  early  times,  how  early 
we  do  not  know,  the  King  did  make  use  of  this  means.  Madox  has 
given  us  the  names  of  such  justices  or  commissioners  in  the  time  of 
Stephen.*  And  Bishop  Stubbs*  says  that  the  examination  of  the  Great 
Roll  of  the  Pipe,  of  31  Hen.  I,  shows  that  during  his  reign  the  prac- 
tice of  the  eyre  was  observed  both  for  financial  and  judicial  purposes. 
It  is  quite  certain  that  the  practice  was  much  earlier  than  a.d.  1176, 
when  Henry  II  divided  the  country  into  six  parts,  and  appointed  eighteen 
itinerant  justices  for  them.  Madox  proves  this  from  the  entries  on  the 
rolls  of  the  Exchequer,*  and  gives  a  long  list  of  the  justices,  of  whom 
some  were  appointed  "  for  pleas  of  the  crown  and  common  pleas, 
and  for  imposing  or  setting  the  assizes  or  tallages  upon  the  King's 
demeans."  Moreover,  as  pointed  out  by  the  learned  author  of  the 
**  Hist,  of  the  Criminal  Law,**^  the  language  of  the  Assize  of  Clarendon 
(1166)  implies  that  in  all  parts  of  England  justices  either  came  or  were 
accessible  at  short  intervals.  After  providing  for  the  arrest  of  robbers 
and  murderers,  the  assize  goes  on  to  say  that  when  persons  are  arrested 
for  robbery  and  murder,  **  if  the  justices  are  to  come  soon  into  the 
county  in  which  the  prisoners  are  in  custody,  the  sheriffs  are  to  send  to 
the  nearest  justice  by  some  intelligent  person  to  say  that  they  have  taken 

»  Stubb's  "Const.  Hist.,"  2nd  Ed.,  p.  187. 

»  Bk.  I,  c.  I  and  2.  '  "  Hist.  Grim.  Law,"  Vol.  I.  p.  82. 

*  "  Hist.  Ex.,"  Vol.  I,  p.  T46.  ?  "  Select  Charters,"  p.  141. 

•  ••Hist.  Ex.,"  Vol.  I,  c.  3.  '  Vol.  I,  p.  100. 


XXXTlH  IXTltODUCTIOX. 


vxri  zriarjaen.  zrA  the  ju>r:ces  are  to  send  bock  to  the  shchns  to  say 
T-Litre  :i>*7  w-tf*  :h*  prijoners  to  be  brocght  before  them,  and  the 
K:i£r*'  iriiill  rjr.rj^  zrji^r.  Lnrfire  ifce  justkes.' 

TL*  >::.^er^  cc  th>:  :u^krs  or  coaunissaoaers  were  detenniiied  bv  the 
fora  ':x  'Jot  c>ci':::.ii:on  under  which  ibev  were  appointed.  Not  mach 
V-^.z  rjj-JA  'jt  yjjjcC  u;»ci  n>e  King^s  power  to  shape  his  commission 
ai  ijC  p>fiLicjl-  hicr  in  practice  the  pnucrpal  comnnsaoos  of  those  days 
t/'jre  ni:x h  resemblance  to  the  commis-iions  of  the  presenL  There  was 
tj-jc  *'-nzle  coocmisi  k>n  for  civ: I  business,  to  hear  the  lesser  avsi/es,  such 
ai  ryy.d  disseisin  and  mort  d'ancestcH".  There  was  the  equally  single 
o>ni3i:i*kio  to  deliver  a  parricu'ar  gaoL  This  did  noc  then,  any  more 
t'.an  Dcnr,  authcnise  the  trial  of  a  prisoner  out  on  bail  The  present 
c-c/iDCiiss:oo  of  over  and  temjiner  was  not  known  bv  that  name.  If  it 
WIS  inU::Tjdtd  that  a  justice  should  have  power  to  try  ail  offenders 
wheL'ier  in  gaol  or  not.  and  to  hear  civil  pleas  beyond  the  lesser  assizes, 
he  received  a  commission  ^  to  hear  aii  assizes  and  all  pleas."  As  early 
as  1225  we  6nd  an  ir.stance  of  the  use  of  the  itisi  frius  clause.  A 
sheriff  is  ordered  to  make  a  return  of  an  inquest  by  a  certain  day,  **  vtl 
afr<2m  Justuiariis  si  prius  in  fortes  illas  veiurirU  ad  assisas  mjxx  dis- 
sdsine^  etc.* 

It  is  not  easy  to  trace  the  growth  of  the  authority  of  the  itinerant 
justices.  Professor  Maitland  summarises  it  concisely  thus  ^  '*  It 
seems  probable  that  the  Justicictrii  erranta  even  in  Henry  Fs  time 
had  fiill  power  to  hear  all  the  then  recognized  pleas  of  the  Crown,  a  list 
of  which  may  be  found  in  the  Legis  Henrid  Frimi?  As  to  common 
pleas,  the  tendency  seems  to  have  been  towards  widening  the  scope  of 
tr.eir  commissions.  In  1 1 76  they  were  specially  charged  to  take  the 
then  ver}-  new  jx/ssessory  assizes  of  mort  d'ancestor  and  novel  disseisin.* 
In  1 1 94  they  mere  to  take  grand  assizes  also  if  only  icoj.  worth  of  land 
or  less  was  in  dL^pute.*  In  1218  they  are  competent  to  take  all  assizes 
and  all  pleas  ;  the  whole  litigation  of  the  country  stands  adjourned 
before  them.*  There  are  rolls  which  surest  that  already  in  John's 
T^"^  the  commissions  sometimes  took  this  most  comprehensive  form ; 
but  of  this  we  cannot  be  very  certain.  Nor  can  we  be  very  certain 
wfiether  more  restricted  commissions  were  not  sometimes  issued.  We 
rrzav  sometimes  find  membranes  covered  entirely  with  possessory  assizes, 
and  it  is  \*trj  possible  that  mere  commissions  of  assize  were  in  use ;  but 
tr.e^e  pr^sessor)-  actions  had  become  so  much  the  most  common  of  all 

*  Yr^-T..,  S'.'t  h-^k,  pi.  721. 

*  I:  :>:.  •'/  *-  ^  :     •  I'iciLi    f  :he  Crown,"  So!.L  Soc.,  pp.  xx  and  xm. 
■  •'  ]>• -.  H"..  Pr  rr.:.'   c.  IC. 

*  "A    ./>.  o:'  .N',r  :jirr.:.!on/'  An5.  4  ani  5. 

'-At..'    'f    iic^,    **•  fioTcndcn/'    \\,\.    III.    pp.    262-7.     Stuhb's    "Select 
Ltjl:  '.:.:  p.  2'X/.  «  •»  Koi.  C,"  Vol.  1,  p.  3S0. 


INTRODUCTION.  XXXIX 


forms  of  litigation,  that  we  may  well  be  entitled  to  this  inference. 
How  splendid  a  success  had  attended  their  institution  may  be  learned 
from  the  Charter  of  12 15,  which  ordained  that  they  should  be  taken 
four  times  a  year  in  every  county.*  Perhaps  the  demand  for  justice 
that  was  thus  conceded  was  a  little  extravagant ;  in  1 2 1 7  once  a  year 
was  substituted  for  four  times.'  Thenceforward,  besides  the  commis- 
sions for  what  were  more  specifically  known  as  eyres  {itinera  ad  omnia 
pladta\  there  were  commissions  of  assize.  The  common  practice  was 
to  issue  a  commission  for  each  separate  possessory  action.  During  the 
first  years  of  Henry's  reign'  the  commissioners  were  generally  four 
knights  of  the  shire.  A  little  later  it  became  usual  to  commission  one 
of  the  royal  judges,  and  allow  him  to  choose  his  own  associates." 

When  justices  were  commissioned  to  proceed  upon  an  eyre  to  take 
all  pleas,  they  were  supplied  with  a  copy  of  the  articles  of  the  eyre,  the 
capittda  itineris.  These  were  a  set  of  interrogatories  directed  to  a  great 
variety  of  matters,  for  the  business  of  the  justices  was  not  merely  to 
redress  wrongs  and  punish  criminals,  but  to  look  after  the  various 
sources  of  the  King's  revenue.  Their  business  was  financial  as  well  as 
legal.  A  large  part  of  the  revenue  of  the  Crown  was  derived  from  fines 
and  amercements  under  judicial  orders.  Matthew  Paris,*  writing  of 
William  de  Eboraco  and  Robert  de  Lexinton,  whose  names  are  to  be 
found  in  this  volume,  says  that  in  1240  "  sub praetextu  justitiae  infinitam 
pecuniam  ad  opus  regis  omnia  dispergentis  collegeruntT  But  the  King  had 
also  rights  of  wardship  and  of  marriage,  of  escheat,  of  presentation  to 
churches,  and  here  and  there  of  demesne,  all  which  needed  supervision 
and  called  for  inquiry.  Hence  the  need  for  the  articles  which  directed 
the  justices  to  the  particular  inquiries  they  were  to  make  from  the 
representatives  of  the  hundreds  and  burghs,  as  they  should  attend  the 
former  on  their  coming  to  the  country.  These  articles  are  not  usually 
to  be  found  in  the  rolls  with  the  commissions.  They  seem  to  have 
been  settled  from  time  to  time  by  the  King  or  his  council,  and  they 
become  more  and  more  detailed  as  time  goes  on.  Roger  Hovenden 
has  handed  down  to  us  those  of  1 1 94  and  1 1 98.*  The  former  are  printed 
in  "Select  Charters,"  p.  259.  They  include  searching  inquiries  after 
the  King's  escheats,  concerning  churches  which  should  be  in  his  gift, 
the  wardships  of  boys  and  of  the  marriages  of  girls  and  widows  which 
should  belong  to  him ;  concerning  the  killing  of  Jews,  and  of  their 
property  and  affairs,  concerning  the  supporters  of  the  King's  brother 
John,  who  had  made  fine  with  the  King,  and  who  not,  and  concerning 
their  chattels  and  those  of  John,  and  touching  John's  lands,  wardships, 

'  "Charter  of  1215,"  Arts.  18  and  19. 

'  "  Charter  of  1217,"  Arts.  13,  14,  15. 

»  That  is,  of  Henry  III.  *  (Rolls  Ser.),  Vol.  IV,  p.  34. 

•  "Hovenden'*  (RolU  Scr.),Vol.  Ill,  p.  263,  Vol.  IV,  p.  61. 


xl  INTRODUCTION. 


and  escheats,  and  all  debts  and  fines  which  were  owing  to  him  ;  con- 
cerning wines  sold  contrary  to  the  assize,  and  as  to  false  measures; 
concerning  those  who  had  assumed  the  Cross  and  had  died  before  their 
departure  for  Jerusalem,  and  as  to  their  chattels.  They  contain  pro- 
visions for  ascertaining  by  inquest  the  King's  rights,  and  for  examining 
into  and  recording  the  affairs  of  the  Jews  by  a  mixed  commission  of 
Jews,  Christians,  and  royal  officers.  There  is  also  the  important  pro- 
vision that  no  sheriff  is  to  sit  as  a  justice  in  his  own  county,  which 
marks  a  distinct  middle  stage  between  the  Assize  of  Northampton  (i  i66), 
in  which  the  sheriffs  share  office  with  the  itinerant  justices,  and  the  24th 
clause  of  the  Great  Charter,  which  forbids  them  to  hold  pleas  of  the 
Crown. 

In  Bracton*  we  have  another  set  for  an  eyre  in  the  Cinque  Ports  in 
1227.  This  set  is  on  the  Close  Rolls.'  The  justices  were  to  inquire 
concerning  all  pleas  of  the  Crown  which  had  previously  been  before  the 
justices  at  Shepway  and  not  determined,  and  those  which  had  arisen 
since  the  last  eyre ;  concerning  all  who  were  in  the  King''s  mercy  and 
had  not  been  amerced  ;  as  to  the  King's  advowsons  ;  as  to  assizes  of 
cloth,  wines  sold  against  the  assize,  and  weights  and  measures  made 
and  sworn,  and  if  preserved  or  provided,  and  whether  the  keepers 
of  the  weights  and  measures  have  taken  pay  from  people  so  that  they 
might  sell  by  others ;  as  to  treasure-trove,  and  concerning  the  King's 
escheats  and  purprestures  made  on  his  lands  ;  as  to  ships  captured  in 
war  and  delivered  up  by  William  of  Wrotham,  to  whom  they  were 
delivered,  and  what  had  become  of  them,  and  as  to  the  sale  of  ships 
or  timber  to  build  ships  for  the  enemies  of  the  King's  father,  and  as  to 
many  other  matters.  Bracton'  gives  yet  another  set  which  Proll  Mait- 
land  points  out  is  very  like  the  set  of  1254  given  in  the  "Annals  of 
Burton,"  p.  330,  which  in  its  turn  is  very  like  an  undated  set  found  in 
the  Gloucester  Cartulary  (Rolls  Ser.),  Vol.  II,  p.  276.  "The  set  in 
l^racton  may  l^elong  to  1254;  it  alludes  to  an  assize  made  ^anno 
^r^/^-r///?' against  receiving  strangers  for  more  than  one  night  This 
prohibition  was  as  ancient  as  1166,  but  in  1253  it  had  been  once  more 
promulgated  by  a  writ  which  is  printed  in  Stubb's  *  Select  Charters,'  (part 
V'l,  \K  362;,  The  Articles  in  the  'Annals  of  Burton,'  however,  which 
Ix-lon;/  to  1254,  do  not  contain  any  similar  allusion."*  This  later  set  in 
Braxton  ij>  v«rry  Icn^ahy,  and  it  is  unnecessary  to  do  more  than  refer  to 
bornc  of  ii>  more  important  provisions.  The  inquiry  as  to  old  pleas  of 
tlic  (Jrown  ib  a<  <  oinpanicd  by  a  provision  that  if  anyone  were  accused 
of  an  olifcncc  whi<  h  might  have  been  put  before  the  justices  of  the 
previ<^us  cyrc,  and  was  not,  he  might  claim  an  exception,  and  further, 

'  Jo.  Hlh.  '  "  Rot.  CI.,"  Vol.  II,  p.  213.  »  Fo.  116b. 

*  Jnii«>«l.  u,  *' .Select  Mi:a5  of  the  Crown,"  p.  xxii  (note). 


INTRODUCTION. 


Xli 


the  twrelvc  jurors  of  the  earlier  eyte  might  be  charged  with  perjury.  Re- 
gard vas  also  to  be  had  as  to  the  manner  of  amercing  a  person.  A  knight 
or  free  man  was  not  to  be  amerced  except  according  to  the  measure  of 
his  offence,  according  to  whether  it  was  great  or  small,  'I'he  merchant 
in  like  manner  saving  his  merchandise  and  the  villein  saving  his 
wainage,  and  this  by  the  judgment  of  trustworthy  men  of  the  visne. 
Earts  and  barons  were  not  to  be  amerced  except  by  their  peers.  A 
clerk  was  not  to  be  amerced  according  to  his  benelice,  but  in  proportion 
to  his  lay  fee,  and  according  to  the  measure  of  his  offence.  We  find 
also  inquiries  concerning  the  King's  serjeanties,  concerning  sheriffs  and 
bailiffs  of  the  Crown  who  have  held  pleas  of  the  Crown  and  have  taken 
amercements;  concerning  Christian  usurers  who  have  died,  and  their 
chattels  ;  as  to  new  markets,  and  alterations  in  the  dates  for  holding  old 
markets  ;  concerning  the  levying  of  new  customs,  the  escape  of  thieves, 
malefaaoTs  in  parks,  fishponds,  and  dovecotes ;  touching  those  who  do 
not  permit  the  bailiffs  of  the  King  to  enter  upon  their  lands  to  make 
distress  or  attachments,  etc.,  and  as  to  the  various  defaults  of  sheriffs 
and  other  officers.  The  conduct  of  the  latter  officials  occupies  a  large 
space,  and  the  interrogatories  are  numerous  and  searching. 

There  is  a  set  of  articles  upon  a  roll  in  the  British  Museum.' 
This  set,  which  has  the  answers  annexed,  is  of  4  Edw.  1.  Reference 
cuuld  be  made  to  others,  but  enough  has  been  written  to  show  the 
character  of  the  instructions  which  the  justices  took  with  them  upon 
their  eyres.  How  they  were  actually  used  I  shall  have  occasion  to 
explain  presendy.  Suffice  it  to  say  here  that  many  of  the  entries  u|X)n 
an  eyre  roll  can  be  seen  at  once  to  be  the  answers  of  the  jurors  to 
questions  put  by  the  articles.  Many  of  the  interrogatories  shortly 
oudined  above  can  be  traced  through  the  presentments  of  the  jurors  on 
the  roll  of  the  Somerset  eyre  (No,  756)  in  this  volume. 

The  justices,  having  received  their  commission,  were  duly  sworn 
to  do  righteous  justice  to  rich  and  poor  alike,  and  to  keep  the 
assize  according  to  the  articles,  after  which  they  were  told  expres.sly 
that  thev  should  as  far  as  possible  serve  the  King's  interests.*  The 
sheriff  of  the  county  was  also  informed  of  the  coming  of  the  justices, 
and  ordered  to  make  the  necessary  preparations.  These  of  course 
depended  upon  the  scope  of  the  commission  under  which  the  justices 
were  to  proceed.  It  would  be  wearisome  to  reproduce  here  the  several 
forms  of  writs  to  the  sheriff  applicable  to  the  several  commissions; 
ihcy  arc  to  l»e  found  set  out  in  Bracton.'  We  may  take  as  an  example 
the  writ  of  general  summons  which  announced  an  eyre,  when  the 
justices  were  about  to  visit  the  country  to  hear  all  manner  of  pleas. 
The  sheriff  was  ordered  to  summon   by  good  summoners  all  arch- 

'  Add-  Koll.  No.  5153.  '  Bracl.,  fo.  109,  '  Fo.  109  it  it./. 


xlii  INTRODUCTION. 


bishops,  bishops,  abbots,  priors,  earls,  barons,  knights,  and  freeholders 
of  his  whole  bailiwick,  and  from  each  vill  four  lawful  men  and  the  reeve 
and  from  each  borough  twelve  lawful  burgesses,  and  all  those  who 
were  wont  and  ought  to  come  before  the  justices  itinerant,  that  they  be 
at  such  a  place  on  such  a  day  before  the  justices.  He  was  also  to 
bring  before  the  justices  all  pleas  of  the  Crown  not  yet  pleaded,  and 
which  had  arisen  since  the  last  visit  of  the  justices  to  hear  all  pleas, 
and  all  attachments  appertaining  to  those  pleas,  and  all  assizes  and  pleas 
which  were  put  to  the  first  assize  before  the  justices,  with  the  writs,  so 
that  they  should  not  remain  through  the  default  of  the  sheriff  or  his 
summons.  He  was  to  make  known  by  proclamation  throughout  his 
bailiwick  that  all  assizes  and  pleas  which  were  attached  and  attermed 
and  not  finished  before  the  justices  of  the  Bench  or  before  the  justices 
on  the  previous  eyre,  or  before  justices  sent  to  take  assizes  of  novel 
disseisin  or  to  deliver  the  gaol,  should  be  brought  before  the  justices  in 
the  same  state  in  which  they  remained.  He  was  also  to  summon  all 
who  had  filled  the  office  of  sheriff  since  the  previous  eyre,  that  they 
should  be  before  the  justices  with  the  writs  of  assize  and  pleas  which 
they  respectively  had  received,  to  answer  for  their  own  times ;  and,  lastly, 
the  sheriff  was  to  have  with  him  his  summoners  and  this  writ.  It  will 
be  observed  that  this  summons  provides  amongst  other  things  for  the 
transfer  of  a  cause  pending  at  Westminster  before  the  Bench,  to  the 
justices  in  eyre.  To  provide  against  this  contingency  of  removal  from 
the  central  court  to  the  country,  the  justices  of  the  Bench  frequently 
gave  a  day  to  the  parties  under  the  nisi  prius  condition,  that  is,  unless 
the  justices  itinerant  should  come  earlier  into  the  country — nisi  justitiarii 
itinerantes  prius  venerint  ad  partes  illas — and  the  cause  proceeded 
in  the  Bench  until  the  circuit  began.  If  the  justices  did  come  before 
the  day  fixed  at  Westminster,  the  transfer  took  effect,  and  it  was  the 
duty  of  the  parties  to  be  ready  to  meet  them.*  The  statement  that  so 
and  so  had  a  day  in  Banco,  at  "  the  bench,"  will  be  found  of  very 
frequent  occurrence  in  this  volume. 

Let  us  now  in  imagination  follow  the  justices  to  the  county  and  see 
what  they  did.  It  will  be  convenient  to  assume  that  they  are  upon 
a  general  eyre,  such  as  that  in  Somersetshire  of  1242-3  of  which  we 
have  the  splendid  record  in  Roll  756.  When  the  King's  justices,  Roger 
de  Thurkelby,  Gilbert  de  Preston,  William  de  Sancto  Edmundo,  and 
Alan  de  Farnham,  reached  Ilchester,  on  the  quindene  of  Hilary, 
there  must  have  been  a  great  array  of  people  of  the  shire  to  meet  them. 
The  sheriff  no  doubt  was  there,  and  if  his  summons  was  duly  obeyed, 
there  should  also  have  been  present  the  sheriffs  who  had  held  office 
since  the  previous  eyre,  together  with  a  number  of  prelates  and  other 

^  Dract.,  fo.  109b.  '  Bract.,  fa  109b  and  lia 


INTRODUCTION.  xllii 


great  persons.  We  can  see  from  the  roll  that  this  was  the  case.  The 
coroners  too  were  there.  There  must  also  have  been  at  least  a  sufficient 
number  of  knights  and  freeholders  from  every  hundred  to  act  as  jurors. 
Every  vill  should  have  been  represented  by  four  of  its  men  and  its 
reeve.  Again,  there  must  have  been  a  numerous  body  of  local  official?, 
pledges,  essoiners,  finders  of  dead  bodies,  suspected  persons,  and  people 
whose  testimony  would  be  required  during  the  proceedings  to  come. 
Ilchester  must  have  been  a  busy  place  at  these  times.  Beyond  this 
multitude  there  is  ground  for  argument  that  every  freeholder  in  the 
county,  except  such  as  may  have  enjoyed  some  special  exemption,  ought 
to  have  been  there.  This  has  yet  to  be  proved,  however.  The  number 
of  defaulters  amerced  during  the  eyre  of  1242-3,  as  appearing  by  the 
roll,  was  not  so  large  as  might  have  been  expected  if  all  the  freeholders 
of  the  county  ought  to  have  attended.  If  we  turn  to  the  form  of  the 
general  summons  we  do  not  get  certain  information  on  the  point.  The 
summons  does  not  say,  without  qualification,  "  summon  all  freeholders," 
but  "  omnes  .  .  iibere  tenentes  de  tota  bailliva  tua  .  ,  ,  et  omnes 
alios  qui  coram  justiciariis  nosiris  itinerant ibus  venire  solent  et  debentJ* 
This  may  perhaps  mean,  "  summon  all  who  are  wont  and  ought  to 
attend,"  that  is,  all  who  properly  owed  suit  to  the  court.  All  who  owed 
suit  to  the  county  court  ought  to  have  been  there,  for  this  court  of  the 
eyre,  besides  being  the  royal  court,  held  by  the  King's  judges,  was  also 
the  ancient  county  court  assembled  for  an  extraordinary  sitting.  "  The 
county,  or  the  county  court  (the  language  of  the  time  has  but  one  word 
for  the  two),  took  an  active  part  in  the  criminal  business.  It  could 
testify  by  word  of  mouth,  for  record  it  had  none,  to  what  had  happened 
at  its  ordinal y  sessions,  it  could  declare  the  customs  of  the  country,  it 
could  say  how  Englishry  should  be  presented,  and  the  like."* 

We  do  not  know  where  the  court  held  its  sittings.  A  county  court 
we  are  told  occasionally  met  in  the  open  air.  Sometime?  it  sat  within 
doors,  and  probably  the  King's  justices  found  the  latter  practice  the 
more  convenient.  Latin  was  then,  and  for  centuries  afterwards,  the 
solemn  language  of  the  law,  but  Norman-French  was  used  in  discussion 
in  the  superior  court,  and  probably  not  a  little  English  must  have  been 
spoken  there,  as  no  doubt  it  was  in  the  inferior  courts. 

The  proceedings  of  the  eyre  were  opened  by  the  reading  of  the  writs 
under  which  the  justices  were  empowered  to   act,  after  which,  says 

>  ••Gloucestershire  Pleas,"  Maiiland,  p.  xxiv.  In  the  "Westmoreland  Assize 
Roll"  No.  979  (40  Hen.  Ill)  the  procedure  seems  to  be  stated  in  an  unusual  form. 
Immediately  under  the  heading  Placita  carotu  on  memb.  10,  is  written,  •*  Corpus 
comitatus  venii  per  dttodecit/t  jura  tores  "  2Li\d  several  following  membranes  are  headed, 
••  adkuc  de  corpore  comitatus,^*  Then  comes,  **  Villaia  dc  Appelby  venit per  duodecim 
iurfliores^^^  and  that  completes  the  record  of  such  pleas.  For  Crown  business  the 
whole  covnty  except  Appelby  aticods  by  twelve  jurors. 


xliv  INTRODUCTION. 


Bracton,  if  it  should  please  the  justices,  some  one  of  the  older  and  more 
discreet  of  them  might  state  the  cause  of  their  coming,  and  its  utility 
and  advantage  if  peace  is  to  be  observed*  This  done,  he  goes  on  to 
say  that  the  justices  should  go  to  some  secret  place — in  aliquem  locum 
secretum — and  having  called  to  themselves  four  or  six  or  more  of  the 
county  magnates,  ^^qui  dicuntur  busones  comitatus  et  ad  quorum  nutum 
dependent  vota  aliorum^^  and  are  to  consult  with  them  about  the 
keeping  of  the  King's  peace.  ''No  satisfactory  explanation  of  this 
strange  word  busones  is  forthcoming,  and  most  critics  have  thought 
that  it  is  a  mere  mistake  for  barones.  But  there  is  a  record  of  John's 
reign  which  speaks  of  the  buzones  of  Gloucestershire.  The  county 
court  had  sent  up  to  Westminster  certain  knights  to  make  oral  record 
of  a  plea.  The  record  it  seems  was  false,  and  the  knights  were  arrested. 
The  order  is  to  this  effect :  let  the  knights  who  are  wont  to  take  part 
in  false  judgments,  and  who  are  buzones  judiciorum^  be  arrested ;  and 
then  two  persons  are  mentioned  by  name  and  are  called  buzones. 
It  may  be  then  that  busones  is  really  a  word,  and  that  of  this  title 
were  known  those  foremost  men  of  the  county  who  led  the  county 
court,  and  were  its  mouthpieces."*  Kelham  renders  the  word 
**  besoigne,"  as  "  plus  sage."  Is  there  any  connection  between 
"busones"  and  "besoigne"?  I  offer  the  suggestion  as  one  more 
attempt  to  explain  the  word.  Whatever  the  busones  may  be,  the  justices 
are  to  explain  to  them  that  all  persons,  as  well  knights  as  others,  above 
fifteen  years  of  age,  should  be  sworn  not  to  harbour  outlaws,  murderers, 
robbers,  and  burglars,  and  that  if  they  should  know  of  such,  they  should 
cause  them  to  be  attached,  and  should  inform  the  sheriff  and  his  bailiffs  ; 
that  if  they  should  hear  the  hue  and  cry,  they  should  forthwith  join  in 
the  pursuit  with  their  households  and  men.  They  should  also  be  sworn 
to  arrest  persons  coming  into  the  town  to  buy  victuals  if  it  be  susf>ected 
that  they  are  for  the  support  of  malefactors  ;  not  to  receive  strangers 
into  their  houses  at  night,  and  if  by  chance  any  one  should  be  received, 
not  to  allow  him  to  leave  before  full  daylight,  and  in  the  presence  of 
some  of  the  neighbours.**^  The  day  of  the  county  magistrates  as  we 
know  them  had  not  come.  They  were  not  appointed  until  1360. 
The  coroners  may  perhaps  be  said  to  have  discharged  duties  similar  to 
those  of  the  magistrates  subsequently  appointed.  But  they  were  elected 
officers,  and  their  powers  soon  became  much  curtailed.  Later  on  we 
hear  of  certain  persons  called  keepers  of  the  peace.  They  too  were 
elected  by  popular  voice,  and  soon  disappeared,  to  be  succeeded  by  the 
nominees  of  the  Crown.  History  does  not  show  that  the  election  of 
magistrates  as  opposed  to  their  appointment  by  the  Crown  ever  worked 
well  in  practice. 

'  Fo.  115b.  ^  Prof.  Maitland,  "  Gloucestershire  Pleas,"  p.  xxiv. 

^  Bract.,  fo.  115b,  and  I16. 


The  next  step  in  the  proceedings  was  to  elect  and  swear  the  jurors 
which  were  to  represent  the  hundreds,  the  boroughs,  and  such  other 
places  as  were  privileged  to  appear  separately,  "  to  swear  by  themselves," 
as  the  expression  was.  These  were  the  sources  from  which  the  justices 
would  expect  to  derive  the  greater  part  of  the  information  they  wtre 
»bout  lo  seek.  It  would  be  for  them  to  answer  the  questions  put  in 
Ac  articles  of  the  eyre,  for  them  lo  make  presentments  of  many  kinds, 
uwill  be  seen  on  reference  to  the  roll.  "  It  would  be  an  anachronism 
10  call  these  juries  grand  juries,  for  [he  petty  jury  was  not  yet  a  perma- 
nent institution;  still  their  chief  office  was  lo  present,  not  lo  try,  though 
Ihc  difference  between  presentment  and  trial  was  hardly  yet  developed,'" 
In  1 194  there  was  a  special  direction  as  to  the  manner  in  which  these 
juries  should  be  chosen,  first,  four  knights  were  to  be  selected  from 
ihc  whole  county,  who,  after  being  sworn, should  elect  two  knights  from 
every  hundred,  and  the  two  being  also  sworn  should  elect  ten  knights, 
or  if  there  were  not  a  sufficient  number  of  knights,  make  up  the  number 
with  bwful  freeholders,  and  the  twelve  should  together  answer  the 
articles  of  the  eyre.'  Bracton  states  the  practice  thus  :  the  serjeant  of 
the  hundred  was  to  choose  four  knights,  who  were  sworn  to  elect  twelve 
knights  or  free  and  lawful  men.  The  roll  of  the  Somerset  eyre  does 
not  give,  as  is  usual  in  such  cases,  the  list  of  jurors  with  the  names  of 
the  electors,  so  that  we  do  not  know  for  certain  how  the  hundredors 
were  chosen  on  this  occasion,  But  so  far  as  my  observation  of  the  rolls 
of  other  counties  has  gone,  I  do  not  find  that  Bracton's  rule  was  strictly 
followed  about  this  time.  In  the  Northumberland  assize  roll  for 
40  Hen.  Ill  {a.d.  i  255-6)'  there  seem  lo  have  been  two  "  electors  "  for 
the  hundred.  The  Berkshire  Assize  Roll  No.  37,  15  and  26  Hen.  Ill 
(,\,D.  1141),  contains  a  list  which  shows  that  two  electors  chose  twelve 
others,  except  in  one  case,  where  they  elected  eleven,  and  in  another, 
the  borough  of  Reading,  where  they  chose  thirteen.  In  Hungerford 
borough  there  were  thirteen  jurors,  but  no  one  is  noted  as  "  elector." 
In  the  Essex  Roll  No.  235,  39  Hen.  Ill  (a.d.  1254-5),  two  electors 
choose  ten.  It  is  the  same  in  the  Hertfordshire  Roll  No.  318, 
32  Hen.  Ill  (a-d.  1247-8).  Many  other  illustrations  might  be  given. 
But  however  this  may  be,  our  hundredors,  when  chosen,  were  submitted 
by  name  to  the  justices,  and  were  thus  duly  sworn.  One  of  them  took 
an  oath  in  this  form  :  "  Hear  this,  ye  justices,  that  I  will  speak  the  truth 
concerning  this  which  ye  ask  me  on  the  part  of  our  lord  the  King,  and 
1  will  faithfully  do  that  which  ye  order  me  to  do  on  the  part  of  our 
lord  the  King,  and  I  wilt  not  omit  for  anyone,  but  will  so  act  according 
to  my  ability,  so  help  me  God  and  these  holy  gospels  of  God.'"    After- 

'  "  Glwjceslctshiri;  Pleas,"  p.  ixv. 

'  Form  of  procmding  on  (he  Judicial  Visilaiion  "Stlcci  Chaiicts,"  p.  259. 

*  Soflea  aociely,  p.  ug,  cd  I'agc.  '  Brad.,  lb.  116. 


xlvi  INTRODUCTION. 


wards  every  of  the  others  swore  by  himself:  "  the  like  oath  which  A  the 
first  juror  has  sworn  I  will  keep  on  my  part,  so  help  me  God  and  these 
holy  gospels."  This  ceremony  concluded,  the  articles  of  the  eyre  were 
supplied  to  them,  and  they  were  told  that  they  must  be  prepared  with 
their  answers  (veredicta)  by  a  certain  day.  Before  they  withdrew  to 
consider  their  answers,  they  were  further  told  privately  that  if  they  knew 
of  persons  of  ill  repute  they  were  to  arrest  them,  and  if  that  were  not 
possible,  they  should  give  the  names  secretly  to  the  justices,  who  would 
take  steps  through  the  sheriflf  to  seize  them,  so  that  justice  might  be 
done. 

The  task  of  the  jurors  thus  set  before  them  was  not  light  It  is  true 
that  in  those  days,  when  the  population  was  scanty,  every  one  was  more 
or  less  known  to  his  neighbours.  We  may  fairly  assume  that  in  the 
thirteenth  century  village,  the  average  population  of  which  was  from 
60  to  80  inhabitants,'  there  was  as  much  curiosity  about  other  ^jeople's 
business  as  there  is  in  the  present  day,  and  that  is  to  say  a  good 
deal.  Moreover,  we  must  remember  that  a  marked  feature  in  the 
system  in  force  for  the  preservation  of  public  order  was  the  responsi- 
bility of  individuals  for  others.  The  head  of  a  household  was  respon- 
sible for  those  who  ate  his  bread.  If  a  servant  committed  an  offence, 
his  master  had  to  produce  him,  and  was  punished  if  he  failed.  The 
frankpledge  was  bound  to  produce  an  offending  member,  or  suffer  for 
the  neglect.  The  strange  guest  for  the  night  could  not  depart  in  the 
morning  except  in  the  presence  of  neighbours.  It  was  incumbent 
upon  everyone  to  try  to  arrest  malefactors.  If  a  thief  or  murderer 
fled,  it  was  the  duty  of  everyone  to  raise  the  hue  and  cr)%  to  follow  the 
track  of  the  offender  to  the  confines  of  the  vill,  and  there  to  show  the 
track  to  the  people  of  the  next  vill,  who  in  turn  should  take  up  the 
pursuit.  If  the  township  neglected  this  duty  it  was  punished  by  fine. 
How  often  this  fine  was  imposed  a  glance  at  the  roll  will  show.  We 
see  moreover  that  bystanders  in  whose  presence  a  man  was  killed,  were 
punished  because  they  did  not  there  and  then  arrest  the  murderer  (No. 
1145).  We  may  therefore  assume  that  it  was  not  so  very  diflScult  for 
the  jurors  to  collect  and  present  all  necessary  information  concerning 
occurrences  of  recent  date,  but  it  was  not  so  easy  to  remember  every- 
thing that  had  taken  place  since  the  previous  eyre  about  seven  years 
before.  Yet  if  they  omitted  by  accident  or  design  to  present  anything 
which  they  should  have  presented  they  were  fined ;  if  they  presented 
something  incorrectly,  if  they  gave  a  wrong  name,  if  they  said  that 
Englishry  had  been  presented  when  it  had  not,  if  they  neglected  to 
give  the  name  of  a  suitor  who  had  made  default  in  answering  the 
summons   to  attend  the  justices,  they  were  fined.     They  could  not 

*  Thoruld  Rogers,  *'  Six  Centuries  of  Work  and  Wages,"  p.  46. 


INTRODUCTION.  xlvii 


escape  the  responsibility.    A  man  riding  from  one  manor  to  another 
fell  from  his  horse  and  was  killed.    The  jurors  of  the  former  did  not 
present  that  he  left  their  manor  in  safety.    They  were  amerced  for 
their  omission  (No.  1167).    Another  set  of  jurors  rightly  presented 
that  a  boy  had  fallen  into  a  vessel  full  of  hot  water  and  had  died,  but 
they  omitted  to  add  that  he  so  fell  while  attacking  a  dog.     The  town- 
ship, not  the  hundred  jury,  was  amerced  for  the  omission.     Why  the 
distinction  was  made  does  not  seem  clear.     If  a  juror  absented  himself 
he  was  fined,  and  apparently  not  always  in  the  same  amount  (see,  e.g.^ 
No.  1455).      The  amount  of  the  fine  depended  probably  upon  the 
resources  of  the  offender.     Perhaps  a  little  pressure  too  was  put  upon  the 
jurors  by  the  great  men  of  the  county.     Philip  de  Columbariis  did  not 
come  to  meet  the  justices  on  the  first  day,  and  it  is  significant  that  the 
jurors  of  the  burgh  of  Caput  Montis  and  of  the  burgh  of  Stowey,  in  both 
which  places  he  was  supreme,  were  fined  for  suppressing  the  fact  of 
his  non-attendance  (see  Nos.  107 1  and  1156).     The  justices  evidently 
did  not  take  the  answers  of  the  jurors  without  examination.     They  had 
the  rolls  of  the  coroners,  the  sheriffs'  rolls,  and  those  oflficers  themselves 
before  them,  and  thus  could  test  the  truth  of  many  of  the  presentments. 
Probably  too  they  examined   the    jurors  personally  when  a  doubt 
presented  itself.     Indeed,  Bracton,  writing  of  the  duties  of  a  justice  in 
cases  of  prosecution  by  the  King  after  the  breakdown  of  an  appeal,  says 
that  it  is  a  duty  to  examine  the  jurors  and  to  sift  their  evidence,  lest 
injustice  should  be  done.*     Again  and  again  we  find  presentments 
checked  and  corrected  in  a  manner  that  compels  us  to  believe  that 
the  justices  had  many  sources  of  information  open  to  them,  and  that 
they  were  astute  and  quick  to  use  them.     It  is  not  quite  clear  whether 
the  answers  of  the  jurors  to  the  articles  were  in  writing  or  by  word  of 
mouth.     We  know  that  the  secret  return  of  names  of  suspected  persons 
mentioned  above  was  in   writing,  Bracton  speaks  of  it  as  ^^  quadam 
schedula^  ]  it  is  referred  to  in  other  rolls  as  rotulus  de  privatis?    It  is 
not  probable  therefore  that  the  general  answers  to  the  articles  were  not 
also  in  writing.     They  did  not  necessarily  lead  to  immediate  action. 
In  many  cases  these  answers  would  be  used  as  the  bases  for  further 
proceedings  initiated  in  the  Exchequer  or  elsewhere,  or  the  King  him- 
self might  have  to  be  consulted  upon  them.     There  a:e  entries  upon 
our  roll  which  seem  to  show  that  the  jurors  did  put  their  presentments 
into  writing,  see  Nos.  796,  916,  1042,  and  11 15.     No.  950  speaks  of  a 
"  written  verdict." 

Whilst  the  hundredors  and  other  jurors  withdrew  to  consider  their 
answers,  we  may  .safely  assume  that  the  justices  entered  upon  the  civil 


»  Fo.  143.  2  Yo,  116. 

'  e,g,^  '*  Gloucestershire  Roll  of  1221,"  pi.  254. 


xlviii  INTRODUCTION. 


business  of  the  eyre.  Our  roll  does  not  tell  us  how  long  a  time  was 
given  to  the  jurors  for  their  work.  Prof.  Maitland  tells  us  that  in 
A.D.  1 221  three  of  the  Gloucestershire  hundreds  liad  a  week  or  rather 
more  allowed  them.*  As  a  rule  the  record  of  the  civil  business  upon 
an  eyre  roll  precedes  that  of  the  pleas  of  the  Crown.  Passing  over 
this  interval  for  the  present,  and  coming  to  the  time  when  the  jurors  are 
ready  with  their  presentments  and  the  Crown  business  of  the  eyre 
proceeds  in  its  usual  course  we  find  the  jurors  of  a  hundred  answering 
the  articles  relating  to  what  may  be  called  the  financial  as  opposed  to 
the  judicial  business  of  the  eyre;  the  King  has  the  right  to  the  marriage 
of  a  lady,  or  to  the  wardship  of  an  infant ;  the  Prior  of  Bradenestoke  lays 
claim  to  franchise  of  gallows.  The  presentments  are  recorded,  and  there 
is  an  end  of  them  for  the  present.  Perhaps  the  King  may  give  some 
directions  by  and  bye,  but  they  do  not  concern  the  justices  further. 
Then  the  jurors  inform  the  justices  that  so  and  so  has  been  accidentally 
killed  under  the  circumstances  stated.  Here  is  a  chance  of  making 
money  for  the  King.  Perhaps  the  finder  of  the  body  has  been 
attached  to  be  present,  and  he  does  not  come.  His  pledges  must 
therefore  be  amerced.  Perhaps  the  body  was  buried  without  view  of 
the  coroners.  That  is  an  ofience  for  which  the  township  must  be  fined. 
Then  there  will  often  be  question  of  deodand,  the  boat  from  which  the 
unfortunate  was  drowned,  the  millwheel  that  crushed  him,  the  tree  that 
fell  upon,  the  cart  that  ran  over  him,  even  the  geese  carried  by  it  must 
be  appraised  and  the  value  paid  as  a  deodand.  Was  the  man  killed  an 
Englishman  or  not  ?  Englishry  may  or  may  not  have  been  presented,  or 
it  may  have  been  done  without  due  observance  of  form.  Again  more 
fines.  Frequently  we  hear  of  the  flight  of  offenders.  They  must  be 
exacted  in  the  county  court  and  properly  outlawed.  More  people  run 
away  in  those  days  than  are  hanged.  Still  we  find  not  a  few  meet 
their  deaths  at  the  hand  of  the  hangman.  When  an  offender  is 
caught  or  comes,  the  justices  deal  with  him  ;  and  now  arises  an  important 
question,  and  one  difficult  if  not  impossible  at  present  to  answer  with 
certainty.     What  jury  tried  him  ? 

At  the  time  under  consideration  the  two  modes  of  bringing  an 
offender  to  justice,  the  appeal  or  private  suit  of  the  injured  person, 
and  the  indictment  preferred  by  the  jury,  ran  side  by  side,  but  the 
procedure  by  indictment  seems  to  be  superseding  the  private  suit. 
In  the  one  case  the  jurors  say  that  so  and  so  has  appealed 
so  and  so  in  the  county  court  of  such  and  such  an  offence.  The 
record  then  says  that  the  appellee  comes  and  defends,  that  is  denies, 
everything  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  The  jurors  testify  that 
he  is  guilty.*     In  the  other  we  are  told  that  so  and  so  is  accused  of 

*  **  Gloucestershire  Pleas,"  p.  xxvi.  ^  See,  e,g,^  No.  1 104. 


INTRODUCTION.  xllx 


such  an  offence.  The  person  indicted  comes  and  puts  himself  upon 
the  country.'  The  jurors  say  that  he  is  guilty.  These  are  simple  cases, 
and  the  question  is,  was  the  convicting  jury  the  same  body  as  that 
which  presented  ?  Mr.  Justice  Stephen*  was  inclined  to  think  not,  but 
Prof.  Maitland,'  while  admitting  that  the  practice  of  Bracton's  day  is 
doubtful,    takes    the    opposite    view  concerning    the    procedure    in 

A.D.   I22I. 

The  presenting  jurors  were  bound  by  their  oaths  to  present  appeals 
and  cases  of  suspected  persons,  but  when  their  turn  came  to  say  one 
way  or  the  other  whether  a  man  was  guilty  or  not,  they  may  have  been 
satisfied  by  personal  knowledge  or  inquiry  as  to  the  truth.  There  is 
an  interesting  example  in  onrroll :  see  Nos.  931  and  932.  The  jurors 
first  present  that  one  Roger  Scurye  was  outlawed  in  the  county  court 
for  wounding  Adam  Crek.  It  seems  that  Adam  died.  The  jurors 
present  further  that  John  Cole  was  attached  by  pledges  because  Roger 
did  the  deed  by  his  order.  They  say  that  John  Cole  did  incite  Roger 
to  attack  Adam.  Thereupon  the  justices  order  John's  arrest.  When 
John  comes,  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country,  and  the  jurors  say  that 
he  is  not  guilty.  Unfortunately  we  do  not  know  whether  the  presenting 
jurors  and  the  jurors  who  acquitted  John  were  the  same.  I  think  that 
the  reasonable  inference  is  that  they  were.  It  seems  from  the  record 
in  No.  932  that  the  charge  against  John  started  with  one  William  de 
Eston,  who  was  fined  for  his  false  indictment.  Whether  William  was 
one  of  the  jurors  of  the  hundred  we  do  not  know,  because  unfortunately 
we  are  wanting,  what  is  usually  given  in  these  rolls,  a  list  of  the 
hundredois.  The  use  of  term  "  indictment "  is  perhaps  rather  against 
this,  and  rather  points  to  him  as  an  individual  from  whom  the  presenting 
jurors  obtained  their  information.  But  too  much  importance  should 
not  be  attached  to  a  word  like  this.  If  jurors  had  doubts,  they  may 
have  been  reinforced  by  other  jurors.  In  an  earlier  roll  in  this  volume 
(No.  755)  we  find  many  instances  of  this.  The  jurors  of  other 
hundreds  are  called  in  for  example.  In  the  roll  under  consideration  the 
practice  seems  to  have  been  to  afforce  the  jury  of  twelve  by  the  jurors 
of  the  four  neighbouring  vills.* 

Must  the  convicting  jury  or  juries  be  unanimous  ?  If  the  solitary 
statement  in  No.  1082  can  be  taken  as  indicative  of  the  usual 
practice,  the  answer  must  be  in  the  negative  :  "  the  jurors  and  the  four 
townships,  except  William  de  la  Ford,  who  is  one  of  the  jurors,  say  upon 
their  oath  that  he  is  not  guilty." 

This  is  a  very  slight  and  general  statement,  but  is  probably  somewhere 
near  the  truth,  and  for  the  present  must  suffice.     One  thing  is  clear, 

>  See  No.  758.  «  "  Hist,  of  Criminal  Law,"  Vol.  1,  p.  258. 

*  **  Glouce  tershire  Pleas,"  p.  xliii.  *  See  for  example,  No.  956. 

g 


1  INTRODUCTION. 


we  have  not  yet  got  the  separate  bodies  of  later  days  with  separate 
functions,  the  grand  and  petty  juries. 

Something  has  been  said  above  of  the  procedure  by  "  appeal,"  the 
ancient,  and  during  the  time  covered  by  this  book  the  still  normal 
mode  of  bringing  a  criminal  to  justice.  It  was  the  private  suit  of  the 
injured  person  or  his  relative  against  the  injurer.  It  began  in  the 
county  court  or  in  the  hundred  court  (see  No.  757)  without  any  writ, 
by  the  relation  there,  before  the  coroners  or  other  proper  officers,  of  the 
charge  in  a  carefully  chosen  form  of  words,  to  which  great  importance 
was  attached.  The  appellor  was  required  to  set  forth  with  great  pre- 
cision the  time,  place,  and  circumstances  of  the  offence,  so  that  the 
appellee  might  be  able  to  defend  himself.  From  this  statement  he 
could  not  afterwards  vary  without  risk  of  failure.  The  extent  of  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  local  court  to  determine  matters  of  this  kind  is  a 
difficult  question,  but  this  may  be  said,  that  all  appeals  involving  pleas 
of  the  Crown  must  be  determined  by  the  King's  justices,  and  in  such 
cases  the  appeal  when  duly  commenced  in  the  local  court  must  be 
adjourned  to  them  to  be  presented  by  the  jurors  on  the  coming  of  the 
eyre.  All  questions  involving  a  possible  conviction  for  felony  were  so 
adjourned.  Then  arises  the  question,  what  was  a  *'  felony  "  ?  I  cannot 
do  better  than  make  another  quotation.^ 

'*  This  word,  expressive  to  the  common  ear  of  all  that  was  most  hate- 
ful to  God  and  man,  was  soon  in  England  and  Normandy  a  general 
name  for  the  worst,  the  utterly  *  bootless '  crimes.  In  later  days 
technical  learning  collected  around  it  and  gave  rise  to  complications, 
insomuch  that  to  define  a  felony  became  impossible ;  one  could  do  no 
more  than  to  enumerate  the  felonies.  But  if  we  place  ourselves  in 
the  firsi  years  of  the  thirteenth  century,  some  broad  statements  seem 
possible,  (i)  A  felony  is  a  crime  which  can  be  prosecuted  by  an 
appeal,  that  is  to  say,  by  an  accusation  in  which  the  accuser  must,  as  a 
general  rule,  offer  battle,  (ii)  The  felon's  lands  go  to  his  lord  or  to 
the  King,  and  his  chattels  are  confiscated,  (iii)  The  felon  forfeits  life 
or  member,  (iv)  If  a  man  accused  of  felony  flies,  he  can  be  outlawed. 
Conversely,  every  crime  that  can  be  prosecuted  by  appeal,  and  every 
crime  that  causes  a  loss  of  both  lands  and  goods,  and  every  crime  for 
which  a  man  shall  lose  life  or  member,  and  every  crime  for  which  a 
fugitive  can  be  outlawed,  is  a  felony.  We  thus  define  felony  by  its 
legal  effects  ;  any  definition  that  would  turn  on  the  quality  of  the  crime 
is  unattainable.  We  may  see  however  that  in  Bracton's  day  the  word 
imparts  a  certain  gravity  in  the  harm  done  and  a  certain  wickedness 
in  the  doer  of  it.  The  justices  have  been  compelled  to  set  limits  to 
the  *  appeal  of  felony,'  for  sometimes  not  only  the  accuser,  but  the 

»  "  Hist.  English  Law."  Vol   II,  pp.  464-8 


INTRODUCTION. 


li 


I 


■urcuscd  also  will  be  desirous  ol  tiding  for  the  seUlement  of  tnvial  dis- 
putes a  process  which  sanctifies  a  good  open  fight  in  the  presence  of  a 
distinguished  company.  '  Wickedly  and  in  felony  you  struck  the  dust 
from  my  caji ! ' — if,  says  Bracton,  an  appellor  speaks  thus,  the  justices 
niiist  quash  the  api^cal,  although  the  appellee  wishes  to  deny  the  charge 
'  by  his  body.'  In  the  department  of  violence  to  the  person  a  line  is 
drawn  between  the  wound  and  the  bruise;  'blind  blows,"  which 
neither  break  bone  nor  draw  blood  ate  no  sufficient  fuundation  for  a 
charge  of  felony.  But  the  word  is  also  being  used  to  signify  the  moral 
guilt  which  deserves  a  punishment  of  the  highest  order.  Homicide  by 
felony  is  frequently  contrasted  with  homicide  by  misadventure,  homi- 
cide by  self-defence,  and  homicide  committed  by  one  who  is  of  un- 
sound mind  ...  By  the  process  which  we  have  endeavoured  to 
trace  a  certain  group  of  crimes,  comprising  homicide,  mayhem,  wounding, 
false  imprisonment,  arson,  rape,  robbery,  burglary  and  larceny  was 
broadly  marked  off  from  all  minor  offences.  They  were  all  felonies 
and  unernendable  crime,  which  deserved  a  judgment  'of  life  or 
member,"  they  worked  a  disherison." 

The  mode  of  trial  of  such  cases  in  the  earlier  days  of  our  period 
was  the  duet.  If  a  man  were  not  beyond  the  age  for  fighting,  60  years, 
or  mayhemed,  in  which  case  he  had  to  go  to  the  ordeal,  so  long  as  this 
was  part  of  the  recognised  machinery  of  justice,  the  api)ellor  must 
offer  to  deraign  by  his  body,  and  the  appellee  must  similarly  offer  in 
defend.  The  appeal  was  informal  withoui  such  an  offer.'  If  the 
appellor  were  a  woman,  of  course  she  could  not  offer  to  fight.  In  such 
a  case  the  appellee  was  tried  by  the  country.  In  la'er  days  when 
Braclon  wrote,  the  a|>peilor  could  either  defend  by  his  body  or  put 
himself  upon  the  countrj-.  The  latter  practice  had  crept  in  by  degrees. 
At  first  the  jury  was  allowed  to  determine  some  matter  of  exception  to 
the  appeal,  not  the  substantive  question  of  guilt  or  innocence.  The 
appellee  pleaded  an  alibi,  or  that  the  appeal  was  instigated  by  hate  and 
spite.'  In  such  cases  as  these  the  truth  or  converse  of  the  plea  was 
tried  by  a  jury.  Finally,  the  whole  question  came  to  be  one  proper  for 
determination  by  the  country,  and  with  the  change  we  find  a  growing 
tendency  on  the  part  of  the  justices  to  discourage  the  private  appeal. 
They  quashed  appeals  on  slight  grounds,  and  often  on  grounds  which 
are  not  apparent  upon  the  record,  and  having  so  got  rid  of  them,  pro- 
ceeded to  li5'  the  persons  charged  on  what  was  practically  the  suit  of 
the  King  himself.  A  culprit  was  not  to  escape  merely  because  the 
appeal  failed  in  form.  For  the  prescn'ation  of  order  and  the  keeping 
(A  the  King's  peace  the  charge  must  be  inquired  into,'  So  by  degrees 
the  appeal  of  the  individual  becomes  superseded  by  the  indictment  of 


■    BiMt.,  fu.    I,|3l>. 


'  No-  929  is  a  gooii  cuample  of  such  ■ 


Ill  IXTRODLXTIOX 


the  country,  but  the  procedure  was  not  finally  abolished  until  the 
Statute  59  Geo.  Ill,  c  46  was  passed,  consequent  upon  the  proceedings 
in  Ashford  v.  Thornton,  the  last  s^peal  of  murder  ever  brought. 
Thornton,  who  was  suspected  of  murder,  was  tried  and  acquitted  at  the 
Warwick  assizes.  After  this,  in  November,  181S,  an  app&d  of  the  old 
kind  was  brought  by  the  brother  of  the  dead  woman.  Thornton 
pleaded  not  guilty,  and  offered  to  defend  by  his  body,  and  taking  off  a 
glove  specially  made  for  the  occasion,  threw  it  upon  the  floor  of  the 
court.  There  was  argument  as  to  Thornton's  right  to  defend  in  this 
way,  but  in  the  end  the  court  decided,  as  the  re^t  of  the  authorities, 
that  Thornton  was  within  his  rights  to  wage  his  body.  However,  the 
appellor  was  not  inclined  to  fight,  and  so  the  duel  never  took  place, 
and  when  Thornton  was  arraigned,  he  pleaded  autrejois  acquity  and  was 
discharged.  More  will  be  found  on  the  subject  of  the  appeal  in  the 
notes  upon  particular  cases  in  this  volume. 

There  was  another  way  in  which  criminals  were  occasionally 
brought  to  justice.  I  refer  to  the  case,  of  which  there  are  some 
examples  in  this  book,  where  a  convicted  or  confessed  offender  has 
turned  approver  in  the  hope  of  saving  his  own  neck.  In  such  a  case 
it  lay  with  the  King,  if  he  thought  fit,  to  make  a  bargain  with  the 
approver  that  he  should  be  saved  harmless  in  life  and  limb,  provided 
he  should  rid  the  country,  by  battle,  trial  or  flight,  of  a  certain  agreed 
number  of  other  malefactors.  The  approver  confessed  his  crime  before 
the  coroners,  who  recorded  the  confession,  and  he  then  proceeded  to 
charge  with  some  felony  or  other  the  required  number.  They  must 
have  been  persons  known  to  him,  for  if  he  could  not  recognise  them 
when  brought  face  to  face  before  the  justices,  he  failed  in  his  attempt 
If  the  accused  person  was  a  lawful  man,  in  frankpledge,  and  had  a 
lord  who  would  warrant  him,  he  might  put  himself  upon  the  countr>', 
and  if  acquitted  the  approver  went  to  his  doom.  If,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  person  accused  was  not  in  tithing,  and  had  no  lord  who  would 
warrant  him,  he  sank  to  the  social  level  of  the  approver,  and  could  not 
put  himself  upon  the  country.  His  only  defence  then  was  to  fight.  If 
the  accused  sought  to  escape  the  charge  by  flight,  he  was  outlawed  at 
the  suit  of  the  King  without  any  other  suit.  When  the  approver  and 
accused  were  confronted  before  the  justices,  the  former  made  his  accusa- 
tion. He  had  to  repeat  his  story  without  any  variation,  and  offer  to 
prove  it  by  his  body,  as  the  court  should  direct.  Then  the  accused 
defended,  or  denied,  word  for  word,  whatever  was  imputed  to  him,  and 
if  he  could  not  claim  the  benefit  of  trial  by  the  country,  he  had  to  offer 
to  fight.  The  court  then  ordered  the  approver  to  find  sureties  to 
deraign,  and  the  accuser  likewise  to  defend,  and  they  were  ordered  to 
(  onic  on  a  given  day  armeti.  On  the  appointed  day  the  parties  entered 
the  hbts,  and  the  accused,  taking  the  accuser  by  the  hand,  swore  thus: 


INTROnUCTIOV. 


liii 


"  Hear  ye  this,  thou  man  whom  1  hold  by  the  hand,  and  who  callest  thy- 
self A  byname  of  baptism,  I  am  not  a  thief" — or  according  to  the 
accusation — "so  may  God,  etc."  In  his  turn  the  approver  swore  :  "Hear 
this,  thou  man  whom  I  hold  by  the  hand,  who  callest  thyself  B  by  name 
of  baptism,  that  ihou  art  perjured,  because  thou  art  a  thief,"  again 
repratitigiheaccusation,  "somay  God,  etc."  Then  the  duel  proceeded. 
I  r  the  accused  were  vanijuished,  and  cried  "  craven,"  he  was  condemned. 
and  the  approver  repeated  the  process  with  another,  and  so  oii.  If 
however  the  latter  found  his  match,  and  was  beaten  before  the  stars 
appeared,  the  K.ing  kept  his  side  of  the  bargain  and  hanged  him. 
Sometimes  I  think  he  had  another  chance,  but  if  so  it  was  a  matter  of 
favour.  It  was  important  to  get  rid  of  rogues.  But  the  successful 
cnrabatant  nevertheless  did  not  escape  entirely.  He  had  to  find  sure- 
ties by  reason  of  the  suspicion  caused  by  the  accusation.  If  he  could 
not.  he  had  to  go  to  ])rison  or  to  abjure  the  realm.  Again,  if  the 
approver  died  before  he  had  finished  his  duels  or  was  beaten  in  one  of 
them,  the  accused  who  had  not  yet  had  their  chance  of  tighttng  him 
were  nevertheiess  objects  of  suspicion,  and  so  bound  to  find  sureties  or 
abjure  the  realm.  If  the  appiover  fulfilled  his  bargain  to  the  letter,  he 
had  his  hfe  and  limbs,  but  he  was  not  allowed  to  remain  within  the 
realm,  even  if  he  could  find  sureties,'  There  is  a  very  interesting  little 
contemporary  picture  of  a  judicial  combat  between  an  approver  and  an 
accused  on  a  fragment  of  an  assize  roll  of  the  time  of  Henry  HI ;  the 
precise  date  is  uncertain.  It  depicts  one  Walter  Bloweberme  the 
approver  fighting  Hamo  le  Stare,  whom  he  had  accused  of  complicity 
in  theft  at  Winchester.  Hamo  was  beaten,  and  the  picture  shows  him 
Upon  the  gallows  in  the  background.  The  picture  was  probably  drawn 
by  the  clerk  who  saw  the  fight.  He  shows  the  parties  armed  wiih 
weapons  like  a  miner's  pick,  and  provided  with  rectangular  shields. 
'Hie  drawing  has  been  reproduced  by  a  wood  cut  by  Madox  ("  Hist,  of 
the  Exchequer,"  Ed.  1769,  Vol.  I,  p.  551),  but  a  much  better  copy  by 
photography  is  given  as  a  frontispiece  to  "  Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown  " 
(Seld.  Soc.). 

If  a  person  was  under  suspicion  or  accusation,  the  obvious  way  to 
escaije  trouble  and  possible  conviction  was  to  run  away,  and  this,  to 
judge  from  the  roils  of  the  time,  seems  to  have  been  the  course 
generally  adopted.  For  the  number  of  criminals  actually  tried  and 
hanged,  it  is  surprising  how  many  escaped.  Many  seem  to  have  run 
away  in  panic,  lest  the  result  of  some  accident  should  bring  them  into 
trouble,  and  for  less  sufficient  reasons.  They  generally  came  back,  we 
may  suppose,  particularly  when,  as  often  happened,  the  justices  gave 
lh«m  leave.     But  the  greater  number  absented  themselves  for  good. 

'  S'.t  Bracmn,  fo.  152— fu.  153b. 


liv  INTRODUCTION. 


What  then  could  be  done  ?  If  they  had  been  attached  previously  to 
their  flight,  their  pledges  were  amerced  for  not  producing  them.  If 
they  were  in  frankpledge,  their  tithing  had  to  pay.  But  for  the  fugitive 
himself  there  was  only  outlawry.  The  justices  are  told  that  Richard 
killed  John  and  fled.  They  answer,  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed, 
let  him  be  proclaimed,  that  is,  at  five  succcessive  county  courts,  or  four 
if  the  first  formal  calling  be  not  counted,  and  if  he  does  not  come  in, 
declare  him  an  outlaw.  "  Caput  gereret  lupinum,  let  him  bear  the  wolfs 
head,  this  was  the  sentence  of  the  county  court,"*  or  sometimes  the 
justices  will  direct  that  the  offender  be  "  treated  as  outlawed."  Why 
it  should  be  sometimes  "  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed,"  at  others 
"  let  him  be  treated  as  outlawed,"  is  not  apparent,  but  we  have  several 
instances.'  Outlawry  was  a  procedure  that  was  in  constant  use  in  the 
county  court  as  a  means  to  compel  appearance  of  the  accused  upon 
a  pending  appeal.  All  appeals,  it  will  be  remembered,  were  commenced 
in  the  county  court.  If  the  defendant  did  not  come,  he  was  promptly 
exacted  until  he  did.  The  consequences  of  outlawry  were  not  light. 
If  the  outlaw  could  be  captured  and  taken  before  the  justices,  he  went 
to  the  gallows  without  further  proof  than  of  the  fact  of  outlawry.  His 
property,  if  he  had  any,  was  forfeited,  the  chattels  to  the  Crown,  the 
land  to  his  lord,  subject  to  the  King's  right  to  it  for  a  year  and  a 
day  and  to  waste  it  If  he  resisted  capture,  he  might  be  killed  with 
impunity.  Still,  if  a  man  preferred  his  life  and  limbs  to  everything 
else,  he  had  a  good  chance  to  keep  them  safe  and  sound.  The  country 
was  wild  and  thinly  populated.  True,  a  man  outlawed  in  one  place  was 
an  outlaw  everywhere,  but  the  arm  of  the  sheriff*  was  not  long  enough 
to  stretch  beyond  the  boundaries  of  his  shire.  A  boy  under  the  age 
of  twelve  could  not  be  outlawed,  nor  could  a  woman,  because  neither 
could  be  in  law,  that  is,  in  frankpledge  or  tithing.  But  a  woman  could 
be  waived  and  left  derelict — a  waif  whom  no  man  would  warrant  or 
prince  protect.' 

If  a  felon  were  overtaken  by  his  pursuers  with  the  evidences  of  his 
crime  upon  him  he  might  be  killed  if  he  resisted  capture.  If  he  were 
taken  he  was  in  little  better  case.  The  local  court  would  give  him 
short  shrift,  and  he  could  not  be  heard  in  his  defence.  Two  men 
were  so  taken  for  burglary,  and  were  hanged  by  the  hundred  court  of 
Cheddar  (No.  785).  The  King's  justices  however  were  inclined  to 
discourage  this  species  of  self  help.  We  have  a  case  in  which  four 
thieves  were  beheaded  by  their  pursuers  after  they  were  taken,  and  the 
justices  exacted  a  heavy  fine  (No.  990). 

J  Bract,  fo.  125b  and  fo.  128,  "Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown"  (Seld.  Soc.),  pL  47. 
*  See  Nos.  147,  177,  194,  240,  258.    No.  189  is  such  a  case  after  return  of  a 
person  who  had  abjured  the  realm 
3  Bract.,  fo.  125b. 


INTRODUCTION.  Iv 


It  often  happened,  however,  that  a  fugitive  did  not  get  clean  away  ; 
the  hue  and  cry  may  have  been  too  close  upon  his  heels;  he  may  have 
become  an  object  of  suspicion  in  the  new  country  traversed  by  him,  or 
for  many  other  reasons  he  may  have  been  driven  to  take  sanctuary.  Any 
church  would  afibrd  him  a  refuge,  and  once  inside  he  would  be  safe 
for  a  time.  The  four  neighbouring  townships,  if  they  did  their  duty, 
surrounded  the  building  to  prevent  his  escape,  and  sent  for  a  coroner. 
The  latter  came  and  parleyed  with  the  fugitive.  If  the  latter  confessed 
himself  guilty,  it  was  open  to  him  there  and  then  to  take  an  oath  to  quit 
the  realm  and  never  to  return.  He  was  then  allowed  to  leave  for  the 
port  of  departure,  which  in  early  days  he  seems  to  have  selected  for 
himself;  later  on  the  coroner  assigned  the  port.*  Dover  was  the  port 
most  commonly  used.  After  taking  the  oath  at  the  church  gate  he  had 
to  b^n  his  journey.  He  bore  in  his  hand  a  wooden  cross,  "the 
warrant  of  the  holy  church,"  and  so  barefooted,  bare-headed,  ungirt  and 
clothed  only  in  his  coat'  he  was  compelled  to  travel  by  the  direct 
highway,  never  to  leave  it  except  to  seek  shelter  for  the  night,  and  never 
to  spend  two  nights  in  the  same  place.  If  he  left  the  highway  he 
ran  the  risk  of  being  pursued,  treated  as  an  outlaw,  and  perhaps 
beheaded  on  the  spot.^  Arrived  at  his  port  his  duty  was  to  embark  at 
once.  If  there  were  no  vessel  ready  to  sail  he  should,  each  day,  wade 
into  the  sea  to  his  knees,  or  to  his  neck,  to  show  his  inability  to  get 
across.  If  he  had  to  rest  for  a  night  his  sleep  must  he  on  the  beach. 
If  he  could  not  quit  the  realm  within  the  allotted  time  fresh  sanctuary 
bad  to  be  sought.*  His  property  was  confiscated,  and  if  he  returned  from 
abroad  he  was  treated  as  an  outlaw.  '*  Walter  the  fair  haired  abjured 
the  land  of  our  lord  the  King  in  the  time  of  King  John  for  the  death 
of  Robert  the  basket-maker.  He  afterwards  returned,  and  abode  in  the 
vill  of  Stineleg.  The  township  knew  of  this,  and  did  not  take  him  ; 
therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  dealt  with  as  if  outlawed" 
(No.  189).  We  see  further  that  the  township  was  fined  a  mark  for  this 
(No.  383).  The  King  took  Walter's  chattels  valued  at  2  marks,  and  if 
he  had  not  fled,  Walter  would  have  been  hanged. 

If  the  fugitive  would  neither  confess  nor  leave  the  church  it  seems 
that  he  had  forty  days  allowed  him  for  re-consideration.  During  this 
time  the  four  townships  no  doubt  had  still  to  keep  their  watch*  night 

'  Dr.  Gross  says  that  since  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Edward  I  the  coroners 
asigned  the  port.  In  this  volume,  however,  we  have  such  a  case  in  Henry  IK. 
See  No.  804.  '  See  Britton,  fo.  25b. 

*  See  *•  Select  Coroners'  Rolls  "  (Seld.  Soc.),  pp.  37  and  76. 

*  R^llc,  p.  18. 

*  Sec  ''Select  Coroners'  Rolls"  (Seld.  Soc.),  p.  86-7.  "Select  Pleas  of  the 
Crown"  {Mi,)t  pi.  135,  where  the  Abbot  of  Bordesley  came  with  his  monks  and 
actually  carried  off  the  fugitive,  disguised  by  a  cowl,  through  the  watching  townsmen, 
who  were  in  the  King's  mercy  accordingly.' 


Ivi  INTRODUCTION. 


and  day,  and  we  can  imagine  the  grumbling.  If  at  the  expiration  of  the 
period  of  grace  he  was  still  obdurate  he  could  not  be  dragged  forth. 
The  lay  hand  could  not  profane  the  holy  place.  It  would  be  ^^horribt/e 
et  nefandum^^  as  Bracton  says.*  It  was  argued  that  he  ought  to  be  starved 
into  submission.  This  was  Bracton's  recommendation,  but  even  this  was 
resented  by  the  ecclesiastics.  Bracton  also  thought,  clerk  as  he  was,  that 
the  ordinary  or  the  parson  of  the  church  might  well  help  the  lay  court 
and  eject  him.*  Writing  later  Britton  says'  that  a  felon  might  remain 
in  sanctuary  for  forty  days  from  the  day  of  the  coroner's  coming  to  him. 
If  he  abode  longer  he  could  not  abjure,  and  after  the  forty  days  no  one 
should  give  him  meat  or  drink  or  have  any  communication  with  him. 
Anyone  who  gave  him  food  was  the  King's  enemy.*  Notwithstanding. 
Bracton's  holy  horror  at  the  possibility  of  violation  of  sanctuary,  fugi- 
tives were  not  unfrequently  dragged  forth  by  the  lay  hand.* 

The  clergy  were  not  considered  to  be  within  the  practice.  The 
English  prelates  complained  to  Henry  III.  that  clerks  were  compelled 
to  abjure,  and  he  promised  to  put  an  end  to  the  abuse.  The  reason 
why  the  clergy  declined  the  apparent  advantage  seems  plain.  A  clerk 
was  subject  only  to  the  ecclesiastical  court  for  his  felony,  a  court  which 
never  punished  by  loss  of  life  or  limb,  so  nothing  was  to  be  gained  in 
this  respect  by  abjuration.  Again,  to  confess  to  the  coroner  and  be 
sworn  by  him  would  imply  a  recognition  of  the  lay  tribunal  that  no 
cleric  could  bring  himself  to  concede. 

The  subject  of  the  "  abjuration  of  the  realm  "  has  been  discussed 
by  M.  Andr^  R^ville  in  a  paper*  to  which  reference  has  already  been 
made.  He  considers  it  to  be  of  Anglo-Saxon  rather  than  Norman 
origin  and  to  have  been  the  logical  development  of  the  unquestionably 
Saxon  process  of  outlawry  coupled  with  the  right  to  sanctuary  common 
to  all  Christian  people.  To  be  an  outlaw  meant  banishment  from  the 
then  haunts  of  men,  to  impassable  forests  and  marshlands.  True,  the 
King  could  not  exact  an  oath  from  the  outlaw  never  to  return.  That 
was  not  possible  by  the  nature  of  the  case.  The  return  could  only  be 
guarded  against  by  the  sanction  of  swift  and  inevitable  punishment  of 
death.  But  when  the  King  had  the  fugitive  in  his  power,  within  the 
consecrated  place,  he  could  impose  his  own  terms;  and  while  in 
deference  to  the  sanctity  of  the  refuge  he  spared  life  and  limb,  he 
exacted  the  oath  of  abjuration  in  return. 

It  is  not  necessary,  for  the  purpose  of  this  Introduction,  to  dwell 
upon  the  development  or  changes  in  the  practice  of  much  later  times. 
Suffice  it  to  say  that  Henry  VIII.,  while  retaining  the  ancient  forms  and 
ceremonies,  discontinued  the  practice  of  banishing  the  criminal  without 

1  fo.  136.  *  Ibid.  '  ff.  25  and  26.  *  Fleta,  fo.  45. 

*  See  Keville,  pp.  29-31.  •*  **  Revue  Historique,"  Vol.  50,  p.  1. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ivii 


the  realm,  and  instead  consigned  him  to  some  specified  place  within  the 
kingdom  where  he  should  dwell  under  constant  supervision  and  suhjeci 
to  severe  restrictions.  In  Westminster  the  name  of  the  "sanctuary" 
lingers  to  this  day,  Whitefriars  and  the  Savoy  were  long  known  as 
sanctuaries  with  ei-il  reputation.  By  a  later  statute  of  the  same  King 
the  inconvenience  of  these  centres  of  criminal  life  was  fully  recognised 
and  the  privileges  of  sanctuaries  such  as  the  above-named  were  abolished, 
leaving  only  as  refuges  consecrated  churches  and  the  like  with  the 
churchyards  adjoining.  But  as  these  places  could  not  be  used  as 
permanent  abodes,  seven  places  of  refuge  for  life  for  evildoers  were 
appointed.  They  were  Manchester  and  York  for  the  north,  Norwich 
for  the  east,  \Vells  and  I^aunceston  for  the  west,  and  Northampton  and 
Derby  for  the  central  parts  of  the  kingdom,  Only  twenty  criminals 
could  be  harboured  at  one  time  in  each.  If  a  place  was  full  the  man 
was  passed  on  to  another,'  The  practice  of  abjuration  was  abolished 
by  Parliament  in  1623-4. 

Incidental  reference  has  been  made  to  the  practice  of  presenting 
cases  of  death  by  misadventure  and  to  the  custom  of  Englishry  as  some 
of  the  means  of  replenishing  the  royal  exchequer.  Let  us  now  consider 
these  matters  somewhat  in  detail,  for  they  form  no  inconsiderable  part 
of  our  record  of  the  pleas  of  the  crown. 

The  chief  function  of  the  four  county  coroners  was  to  hold  inquests 
upon  the  bodies  of  persons  who  had  met  their  deaths  by  violence  or 
misadventure.  Their  bodies  could  not  lawfully  be  buried  until  the 
coroner  had  held  his  view.  If  a  man  were  killed  in  a  house  or  elsewhere, 
or  a  dead  body  were  found  it  was  the  duty  of  the  finder  to  raise  the 
hue.  The  coroner  was  summoned,  and  on  his  coming  he  convened  a 
jury  of  the  four,  five,  or  six'  neighbouring  townships  with  whom  he 
inquired  minutely  into  all  the  circumstances.  If  the  person  was 
feloniously  slain  he  caused  the  suspected  killer  to  be  arrested  and  his 
chattels  appraised,  after  which  ihey  were  delivered  to  the  township  for 
safe  custoidy  against  the  next  coming  of  the  justices.  If  the  death  was 
due  to  misadventure  the  iirst  finder  was  attached  by  pledges  to  be 
before  the  justices.  If,  however,  the  person  accidentally  killed  lived 
long  enough  to  receive  the  last  rites  of  the  church  it  does  not  seem  to 
have  been  the  practice  (o  attach  the  finders,  presumably  because  he 
would  then  have  an  opportunity  of  exculpating  them.^  But  this  was  not 
all.  Granted  that  the  man  had  died  by  accident,  still  there  may  have 
been  a  "  bane  "  or  slayer.  His  horse  may  have  thrown  him,  his  cart  or 
millwheel  may  have  crushed  him,  or  a  tree  may  have  fallen  upon  him  ; 
he  may  have  been  scalded  in  a  cauldron  or  have  been  drowned  from  a 


;i.,  fo.  i:ib. 


Iviii  INTRODUCTION. 


boat — ^all  these  things,  animate  or  inanimate,  must  be  appraised  and 
delivered  to  some  one  for  safe  custody  until  the  justices  come,  generally 
to  the  township,  or  several  townships,  or  even  to  the  head  of  the  tithing 
of  the  dead  man  (No.  836).  Ultimately  the  King  will  take  their  value 
as  deodands,  perhaps  to  give  to  some  holy  use,  perhaps  and  more  often 
not.  The  deodand,  which  survived  as  part  of  the  law  of  England  until 
1846,  is  a  singular  survival  from  primitive  times.  There  seems  to  have 
been  an  idea  that  the  thing  which  caused  the  death  ought  to  be 
punished,  or  that  in  this  way  the  owner  of  the  thing  was  punished  for 
the  evil  wrought  by  his  chattel.*  We  are  told  that  "  a  thing  was  not  a 
deodand  unless  it  could  be  said  *  mavere  ad  mortem,^  If  a  man  was 
thrown  from  his  horse  against  a  tree,  the  horse  was  deodand,  but  not 
the  trunk.  It  seemed  to  be  the  better  opinion  that  if  a  man  watering 
his  horse  fell  and  was  drowned,  the  horse  was  not  a  deodand  unless  he 
had  thrown  his  master."*  But  we  do  not  find  trace  of  these  refinements 
in  the  pleas  before  us,  unless  No.  875,  where  a  man  overcome  by  cold 
fell  from  his  horse  and  died,  could  be  said  to  be  a  case  in  point.  The 
horse  was  not  a  deodand.  On  the  other  hand,  in  No.  103 1  a  man  fell 
from  an  oak  tree  and  was  killed,  and  the  oak  was  a  deodand.  The 
following  are  a  few  of  the  many  deodands  to  be  found  in  these  pleas  : — 
A  horse  from  which  a  clerk  fell  (No.  775),  two  horses  and  the  pillory  of 
the  Templars  which  the  former  dragged  over  on  to  a  boy  (No.  798), 
boats  (Nos.  802,  876),  a  cauldron  (No.  803),  millwheels  (Nos.  863, 918 
and  926),  a  mare  and  a  cart  from  which  a  man  fell  (No.  883),  a  cart, 
the  oxen  which  drew  it  and  the  geese  carried  (No.  891),  a  mare  and 
her  pack  from  which  a  man  fell  (No.  892),  horses  from  which  men  were 
drowned  (Nos.  897  and  1005)1  oxen  and  a  cart  laden  with  a  millstone 
(No.  914),  oxen  and  a  cart  with  its  load  of  crop  (No.  1006),  a  door 
which  crushed  a  man  (No.  1003),  a  boar  pig  which  killed  a  boy 
(No.  1039). 

In  cases  of  death  by  violence,  and  in  Somersetshire  amongst  other 
counties,  also  in  cases  of  death  by  misadventure,  it  was  further  the 
duty  of  the  coroner,  as  the  King's  officer,  not  to  lose  an  opportunity  of 
recovering  the  murdrum^  or  murder  fine  which  the  district  could  only 
escape  by  a  proper  presentment  of  Englishry.  This  was  a  fruitful  source 
of  revenue.  How  common  these  fines  were  in  the  rough  days  of  the 
1 3th  century  a  glance  through  the  pleas  of  the  crown  in  the  assize  rolls 
suffices  to  show.  It  is  usual  to  describe  the  *^  murdrum  "as  a  fine 
imposed  upon  a  district  for  the  secret  killing  of  a  person.  Glanvill 
speaks  of  secret  killing,  and  Bracton  states^  that  the  fine  was  not  imposed 

*  See  as  to  this  "  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  470 ;  **  Hist,  of  the  Criminal 
Law,"  Vol.  III.,  p.  77. 

2  Sir  J.  Fitzjamcs  Stephen,  **  Hist,  of  the  Criminal  Law,"  Vol.  III.,  p.  77. 

*  fo.  135. 


INTRODUCTION. 


where  the  killer  was  known.  Sir  J.  Filzjames  Stephen'  has  also  clearly 
expressed  the  same  view,  Even  if  this  were  so  in  very  early  days,  it 
certainly  would  be  inaccurate  as  a  full  statement  of  the  practice  during 
the  13th  century.  There  are  many  recorded  cases  of  the  infliction  of 
the  fine  whero  the  slayer  was  known.'  Upon  the  roll  of  the 
Gloucestershire  Eyre  in  iiai  there  is  an  entry  that  Geoffry  son  of 
Ralph  kilted  Serlo  and  was  taken.'  He  was  committed  by  the  justices 
to  his  tithmg.  Afterwards  he  put  himself  in  the  church,  confessed  the 
deed  and  abjured  the  realm.  The  entry  concludes  ^^  Engkscheria  non 
til  presentata  quia  niptus  fuit."  On  the  same  roll,  memb.  16,*  we  are 
lold  that  Thomas  Bunting  killed  Ralph  the  smith  and  fled  to  the  church 
and  abjured  the  realm,  yet  here  the  murder  fine  was  infiicied,  no 
Englishry  being  presented.  The  only  difference  between  the  two  cases 
&eeins  to  be  that  one  was  taken  and  the  other  was  not.  Bracton  refers 
to  the  time  of  Cnut  for  the  origin  of  the  practice.  Whether  he  was  right 
or  not  as  to  this  we  have  in  the  Lega  Edwardi  Confissorif' —not  a 
very  resj>ectabte  authority—the  statement  that  when  Cnut  had  become 
established  in  England  and  had  sent  home  the  greater  part  of  his  army 
of  invasion  at  the  request  of  the  English  magnates,  the  latter  guaranteed 
the  safety  of  such  of  the  Danes  as  remained.  Thus  if  any  English- 
man killed  a  Dane  and  could  not  justify  himself  by  the  orde.il,  justice 
was  to  he  done  upon  him.  If  he  fled,  the  township  had  a  month 
and  a  day  to  seek  him,  and  if  it  failed  10  find  him  and  deliver 
him  to  justice  it  was  fined  46  marks,  40  of  which  went  to  the  King. 
What  the  township  could  not  pay  of  this  fine  the  hundred  had  to  make 
good.  It  seems  that  if  within  a  year  the  murderer  was  delivered  tn 
justice  ihe  fine  was  returnable.  The  Leges  IVHUlmi  Coiiquestoris 
varied  the  practice  somewhat.  The  Frenchman,  the  " Francui  homo" 
was  substituted  for  the  Dane.  If  he  were  killed  and  the  men  of  the 
risne  did  not  take  the  killer  within  a  week  they  forfeited  46  marks."  The 
King  further  enjoined  that  if  any  Noiman  or  Frenchman  was  slain  his 
lord  should  have  the  killer  within  a  certain  lime  ;  if  he  failed  he  should 
forfeit  46  marks,  and  what  of  this  he  could  not  pay  should  be  made 
good  by  the  hundred  in  which  the  murder  was  done.'  The  Leges 
Htnri<i  Prime  deal  with  the  subject  more  in  detail:— If  the  slayer 
o(  the  Frenchman  or  Norman  or  man  from  beyond  the  sea  was  not 

'  "  Hist,  of  Criminnl  Law,"  VH.  III.,  p.  j6. 

»  See  "Select  Tins  of  ihc  Crown.'"  SeU.  Soc.,  Nos.  55  anri  Ji7-  Also 
No.  104a  in  Ihis  volume  where  Ihe  sUyer  was  coiivieled,  and  No.  744  where  ho 
wai  no(  only  Inonn  bui  hanged. 

'  Memh.  14.    Sec  "  (JlouceiiriUiiie  Pleas,"  pi.  219, 

•  /-W,,  pi.  303. 

'  SclilDid,  '■  Die  Cearlie  litr  Angeliach^en."  ind  F..1..  pp.  449.  5°^- 

•  1, 12.     Sec  Schmid,  p.  339.  '  "I,  3-     .Si-eSchniiil,  p.  354, 

•  91  and  9a.    Schuid,  p.  4S6-7. 


Ix  INTRODUCTION. 


given  up  to  justice  within  7  days  the  old  fine  of  46  marks  was  imposed, 
of  which  40  went  to  the  King  and  6  to  the  relatives  of  the  slain.  The 
responsibility  for  the  fine  was  fixed  by  the  place  of  the  deed.  If  it 
occurred  in  a  house  the  owner  had  to  pay,  the  hundred  making  up  the 
deficiency.  If  in  the  open  fields,  the  hundred  was  responsible  :  if  in 
the  King's  highway,  the  owner  of  the  adjacent  land.  The  man  slain 
was  taken  to  be  a  Frenchman  unless  the  contrary  was  proved ;  this 
might  be  done  by  the  oath  of  the  twelve  best  men  of  the  hundred. 
There  is  much  more  on  the  subject  in  these  Laws,  but  enough  has  been 
extracted  for  the  present  purpose. 

Gradually  the  practice  became  largely  controlled  by  custom.  Some 
counties,  especially  in  the  north,  were  not  liable  to  the  fine,  and  even  in 
others  particular  districts  were  exempt.  In  Worcestershire,  the  covert  of 
Malvern  forest  was  a  case  in  point.*  That  part  of  Gloucestershire 
which  lies  west  of  the  Severn  enjoyed  a  similar  immunity.' 

The  liability  to  the  fine  could  only  be  escaped  by  proof  in  the 
prescribed  manner  that  the  person  slain  was  English.  This  was  the 
"  presentment  of  Englishry."  The  presentment  was  made  to  the  local 
court  or  the  coroner,  and  in  turn  presented  to  the  justices  when  they 
next  came  into  the  county.  I  have  collected  in  an  Appendix  the 
practice  of  various  counties  as  to  this  custom.  The  list  is  not  ex- 
haustive, but  it  is  fairly  complete,  and  the  variations  in  the  practice  are 
interesting.  It  will  be  noticed  that  in  some  counties  the  fine  was  levied 
in  cases  of  death  by  misadventure  as  well  as  of  homicide.  This  was 
so  in  Somerset,  Berkshire,  Bedfordshire,  Kent,  Northampton,  Essex, 
Herefordshire  and  Oxfordshire.  In  Devonshire  it  was  declared  that  no 
fine  was  exacted  in  the  case  of  persons  drowned  in  the  sea ;  but  this, 
although  not  elsewhere  expressed,  was  probably  the  case  in  all  counties. 
Custom  did  not  run  upon  the  sea.  The  Statute  of  Marlborough 
(52  Hen.  III.),  however,  overruled  this  custom  of  exacting  the  fine  in 
cases  of  misadventure  which  had  become  intolerable  by  reason  of  the 
great  number  of  deaths  through  famine.  The  presentment  was  made 
in  various  ways  :  sometimes  by  two,  one  on  the  father's  side  and  one  on 
the  mother^s  ;  sometimes  by  two  on  each  side,  or  by  two  on  one  side 
and  one  on  the  other.  Occasionally  women  could  not  present,  as  in 
Gloucestershire.  In  Somerset  it  could  not  be  presented  in  the  case  of 
a  woman  and,  although  not  so  stated  expressly  until  the  time  of 
Edward  I.,  in  case  of  young  boys  under  twelve  years  of  age.  In 
Nos.  935  and  937,  where  no  fine  was  imposed,  the  age  of  the  children, 
seven  years,  is  recorded.  The  roll  of  8  Edward  I.,  referred  to  in  the 
Appendix,  shows  that  the  entry  in  roll  No.  756  of  the  custom  of  present- 
ment was  erroneous,  and  so  the  whole  county  had  to  stand  to  judgment 

>  **  Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown,"  Seld.  Soc,  Nos.  128  and  131. 
^  "  Gloucestershire  Pleas,"  Maitland,  No,  1221,  p.  30. 


INTRODUCTION. 


ixi 


for  its  blunder,  In  Devon  presentment  in  the  case  of  boys  could  only  be 
made  where  the  age  w»s  at  least  seven  years.  In  Essex  Englishry  could 
only  be  presented  in  respect  of  males,  and  not  then  if  the  victim  were 
under  three  years  of  age.  In  Hampshire  he  must  have  been  of  the  age 
of  twelve  at  least.  In  some  counties  it  could  be  presented  in  respect  of 
both  men  and  women.  In  Dorset  the  custom  was  regulated  by  the 
King's  charter,  which,  however,  I  have  not  been  able  to  find. 

In  some  counties  the  rolls  state  expressly  that  Englishry  was  not 
piesented.  In  such  cases  it  is  generally  assumed  that  there  is  equally 
no  liability  to  the  murder  fine.  But  is  this  quite  clear  ?  True  it  is 
that  the  Yorkshire  roll  referred  to  in  the  Appendix  has  "No  Englishry  is 
presented  in  this  county,  therefore  no  murder  fine,"  and  that  it  contains 
entries  such  as  this — a  man  is  killed,  not  known  by  whom,  "  therefore 
nothing."  But  the  Warwickshire  roils,  to  which  reference  is  made,  speak 
Ihe  other  way — "  Be  it  known  that  in  this  county  Englishry  is  not  pre- 
sented, therefore  murder,"  and  rolls  Nos.  952, 954  and  956,  which  contain 
such  entries,  Include  many  instances  of  the  imposition  of  the  fine. 
These  contradictory  propositions  suggest  the  need  for  a  more  extended 
investigation  of  the  rolls  of  various  counties  than  I  have  been  able  to 
make.  Another  question  may  be  asked.  If  Englishry  could  not  be 
presented  in  the  case  of  the  death  of  a  woman  or  of  a  person  under  a 
certain  age,  is  it  clear  that  no  murdrum  could  be  exacted  ?  In  other 
words,  did  the  scope  of  the  rule  as  to  presentment  limit  the  cases 
in  which  the  murder  fine  could  be  imposed  ?  The  entries  in  this 
volume,  No.  935  and  No.  937,  appear  to  answer  the  question  in  the 
affirmative. 

As  already  staled,  the  presentment  of  Englishry  was  made  in  the 
local  court  or  to  the  coroners,  and  when  the  justices  came  into  the 
county  the  jurors  of  the  hundred  in  their  turn  presented  the  present- 
ment upon  their  roll.  If  they  blundered  they  were  fined.'  If  the 
]Krsons  who  made  the  presentment  untruly  represented  themselves  to  be 
relatives  of  the  victim,  they,  loo,  were  fined,  and  the  presentment  was 
null  and  void.' 

When  the  fine  was  imposed  who  were  liable  to  pay  it  ?  We  are 
almost  invariably  told  that  it  fell  upon  the  hundred.  But  this,  again,  is 
inaccurate.  I  think  that  perhaps  the  true  answer  is  that  it  was  borne  by 
the  district,  whether  manor,  vil!  or  hundred,  which  was  represented 
before  the  justices  by  a  separate  body  of  jurors. 

In  the  Warwickshire  rolls  we    find  many   instances  of  such    fines 

being  imposed  upon  districts  other  than  hundreds.    In  roll  No.  951  we 

have  "  no  Englishry,  etc  ;  murdrum  on  the  vill  of  Stanley  quia  non 

fartidpat  cum  Aundredo"  (m.  39);  "murdrum  upon  Wylnehal  to  quod 

'  .Sec  Noi.  833,  844,  8S9>  'o^i  and  1096. 

*  See  Nos.  844.  859  snd  1(142. 


Ixii  INTRODUCTION. 


tumparticipat  cum  hundredo^^  (m.  37d).  Similarly  with  Ebstan  (m.  37) 
and  Coventry  (m.  37).  In  the  hundred  of  Kineton  we  have  "  murdrum 
on  the  vill  of  Great  Compton  quia  non  participat  cum  hundredo  "  (m.  34). 
In  roll  No.  954  there  is  a  record  of  judgment  ^^ murdrum  super  manerium 
de  Staunle^^  (ra.  59).  In  roll  No.  956,  on  m,  46,  we  find  this  entry : — 
"  adhuc  de  hundredo  de  KnytieP  (Knightlow) ;  villata  de  Stanley  venit  per 
xijjur.  Quondam  ignotus  inventus  fuit  occisuSy  etc,  etc,  Judm,  murdrum 
supervillatam  de  Stanley  {^\,Qn'^€\^^  eo  quod  non  participat  cum  hundredo,*^ 
On  the  same  roll  (m.  34d)  are  like  entries  affecting  the  vill  of  "  Eton  " 
and  "  Pollesworth,"  and  many  other  entries  to  the  same  effect  could  be 
pointed  out.  In  this  volume,  however,  (No.  774)  we  find  the  township 
of  Banwell  charged,  and  it  did  not  appear  separately  from  the  hundred. 
The  same  observation  applies  to  Dunden  (No.  886).  Here,  again, 
further  inquiry  seems  to  be  invited.  Apparently  free  men  were  not 
liable  to  contribute  to  the  fine.  In  one  of  the  Phillips  MSS.  of  Bracton 
(No.  3510,  fo.  36d),  quoted  by  the  authors  of  the  "History  of  English 
Law"  (Vol.  I.,  p.  534,  note  4),  a  note  from  the  early  years  of  the  four- 
teenth century  says  that  when  the  county  is  fined  for  false  judgment 
**  tunc  soli  liberi  homines  per  quos  judicia  talia  redduntur  divites  et 
pauperes  pro  aequalibus  portionibus  coniribuunt^  nullo  modo  disenariiy 
i.e.  custumarii** 'y  but  ^^  soli  custumarii  et  non  liberi  homines"  pay  the 
murder  fine. 

The  **  Presentment  of  Englishry"  was  abolished  by  statute 
14  Edw.  III.  St.  i.  c.  4  (a.d.  1340),  but  Dr.  Gross  has  pointed  out*  that 
the  practice  nevertheless  survived  for  some  time  after  that  date. 

Passing  now  from  the  Crown  business  of  the  eyre  it  is  necessary  to 
say  something  of  the  proceedings  on  the  civil  side.  Much  cannot  be 
said  here.  The  limits  necessarily  set  upon  this  Introduction  will  not 
permit  of  more  than  very  general  and  elementary  statement,  and,  more- 
over, any  attempt  to  deal  with  the  intricate  details  of  thirteenth  century 
procedure  would  be  to  task  the  patience  of  the  reader  beyond  endurance. 
Here  and  there  throughout  this  volume  notes  have  been  supplied  to 
many  pleas  which  seemed  to  call  for  some  such  explanation.  It  will, 
it  is  hoped,  be  sufficient  here  to  give,  in  as  simple  and  untechnical  a 
form  as  possible,  some  account  of  the  principal  forms  of  assizes,  or 
actions  to  be  met  with  upon  the  rolls.  The  word  "assize"  has  many 
meanings,  and  it  is  necessary  to  bear  them  in  mind.  Sometimes  we 
find  it  used  as  meaning  an  ordinance,  an  enactment,  as  for  example  the 
assize  of  Clarendon,  the  assize  of  the  Forest  or  the  assize  of  Arms.  It 
also  meant  a  jury,  as  in  the  case  of  the  **  grand  assize,"  or  the  assize 
which  "comes  to  recognise"  or  to  declare  the  truth  upon  some  question 
of  fact  in  a  form  of  action  which  in  itself  was  termed  an  **  assize,"  such 

1  Sec  "Select  Coronw*  Rolls,"  Scld.  Sec,  p.  xlui. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ixi 


us  the  assiEc  of  novel  disseisin  or  the  assize  of  mort 
Occasionally  it  describes  the  visit  of  the  justices  (see  No.  1343).  We 
read  frequently  of  the  assizes  of  wine,  bread  and  cloth  as  indicating 
the  regulations  under  which  those  articles  were  to  be  sold,  and,  lastly,  the 
"rent  of  assize,"  meaning  a  fixed  or  determined  as  opposed  to  a  variable 
rent,  is  not  unknown  in  these  days. 

We  may  naturally  expect  to  find  that  the  greater  part  of  the  civil 
business  upon  these  early  rolls  related  to  land,  and  we  shall  not  be 
wrong.  Of  these  actions  by  far  the  commonest  were  the  two  lesser  assizes 
of  novel  disseisin  and  mort  d'ancestor,  which  with  the  assize  utrum 
and  the  assize  of  darrein  presentment  constituted  the  group  of  petty 
assizes  introduced  by  Henry  II.  They  all  possessed  certain  features  in 
common.  In  the  first  place  they  were  all  possessory  actions.  The  ques- 
tion to  be  determined  in  each,  as  we  shall  see,  n-as  a  question  of  fact,  the 
possession  of  a  party.  No  question  of  right  was  involved  ;  that  had  lo 
be  determined,  if  need  be,  by  another  proceeding.  Next  the  question 
was  to  be  answered,  not  in  the  old  way  by  battle  or  compurgation,  but 
by  the  answer  of  twelve  recognitors  sworn  for  the  purpose  who  spoke 
from  their  knowledge  of  the  (acts.  This  introduction  of  the  inquest 
into  real  actions  was  one  of  the  most  important  changes  introduced  by 
the  King,  and  unquestionably  it  had  a  profound  effect  upon  the  develoii- 
ment  of  our  legal  system.  Proof  by  recognitors  in  the  possessory  actions 
by  the  recognitors  of  the  grand  assize  in  proprietary  actions  rapidly  led 
lo  the  use  of  the  jury  in  other  cases.  Proof  by  battle  lingered  with  us 
as  part  of  our  law,  as  we  have  seen,  until  1819;'  proof  by  compurgation 
or  oath-helpers  survived  even  until  r833,'  but  from  the  date  of  the 
ordinances  of  Henry  II.  they  were  gradually  pushed  into  the  back- 
ground. 

The  assise  of  novel  disseisin,  excogitated  and  invented,  as  Bracton 
tells  us,'  after  many  vigils,  was  the  remedy  of  one  who  had  been 
disseised  of  his  land  "unjustly  and  without  judgment."  A  is  in 
possession  of  land,  we  need  not  consider  whether  rightfully  or  not ; 
B  disseises  him,  say  by  turning  him  out  of  his  house,  by  taking  his 
crops,  by  excluding  him  from  his  common,  or  in  other  way,  of  his  own 
motion  and  without  any  judgment  authorising  him  ;  what  is  A  to  da  ? 
If  A  acts  promptly — and  there  is  a  good  deal  of  quaint  learning  in  the 
books  as  to  what  is  promptitude  and  what  is  not' — he  may  in  his  turn 
eject  B.  If,  however,  he  delays,  and  so  is  taken  to  have  sat  down 
under  the  injury,  to  be  "  patient  "  under  the  disseisin,  there  is  nothing 
for  him  but  the  King's  assize.  If  under  such  circumstances  he  try  to 
helphimsclf,  and  succeeds,  the  original  disseisor  may  even  have  his  right 
□(  action  against  him,  because  the  disseisee  in  his  turn  has  disseised 

'  59  Geo.  III.,  c.  46.  '  J  &  -4  Wll.  IV.,  c.  42,  s.  i^. 

'  lo.  t64b.  '  See  Btaci.,  fi>.  163  el  if/. 


Ixiv  INTRODUCTION. 


"  without  judgment."  The  writ  which  A  will  seek  will  state  the  complaint 
that  B  has  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  A  since  a  certain 
date,  the  prescribed  period  of  limitation  which  varied  from  time  to  time, 
and  enjoined  the  sheriff  to  cause  twelve  free  and  lawful  men  of  the 
neighbourhood  to  view  the  place,  and  that  he  should  summon  them  to 
be  before  the  justices  to  make  the  recognition,  to  declare  the  fact. 
The  proceedings  will  be  summary.  B  will  not  be  allowed  any  essoin — 
that  is,  any  of  the  excuses  allowed  in  other  proceedings  for  non-attend- 
ance on  the  appointed  day.  If  he  fail  to  appear  the  assize  will  be 
taken  in  his  absence.  If  A  succeeds  he  will  have  his  seisin  again,  if 
need  be  with  the  help  of  the  sheriff.  The  duty  of  the  jurors,  as  fixed 
by  the  writ,  was  to  answer  the  main  question.  Has  there  been  a  disseisin 
without  judgment  ?  But  a  defendant  might  take  some  exception,  raise 
some  special  plea  why  the  assize  should  not  proceed — why  the  simple 
question  raised  by  the  writ  should  not  be  answered  by  a  plain  **  yes  " 
or  "  no."  In  this  way  different  questions  of  fact  might  be  raised  which 
by  consent  of  the  parties  were  submitted  to  the  jurors.  The  assize  was 
then  turned  into  a  jury,  as  the  phrase  was,  and  the  distinction  between 
the  assisa  and  jurat  a  was  not  unimportant.  The  former  might  be 
attainted  by  the  process  of  conviction,  by  an  appeal  we  might  not 
quite  accurately  call  it  in  our  modem  language ;  the  latter  could  not 
because  the  parties  had  put  themselves  upon  it  and  had  agreed  to  be 
bound  by  its  finding. 

The  disseisin  complained  of,  to  give  the  court  jurisdiction,  must 
have  been  novel,  that  is  to  say  it  must  have  happened  within  the  period 
of  imitation  from  time  to  time  fixed  by  royal  ordinance.  The  form  of 
writ  given  in  Glanvill*  assigns  the  King's  last  crossing  to  Normandy  as 
the  limit.  In  2  John  (a.d.  1200) "since  Michaelmas  next  before  the 
coronation  of  King  John"  is  mentioned.*  In  3  John  (a.d.  1201)  the 
second  coronation  of  King  Richard  was  substituted.'  In  4 and  5  John 
(a.d.  1202-4)  we  find  since  "the  coronation  of  our  lord  the  King  at 
Canterbury."*  In  21  Hen.  III.  (a.d.  1236-7)  the  King's  first  crossing 
into  Gascony,  or  according  to  the  best  evidence,  into  Britanny  in  1230 
was  the  prescribed  limit.'  In  3  Edw.  I.  (a.d.  1275)  the  period  was  again 
altered  to  the  first  crossing  of  Henry  III.  into  Gascony,  assumed  to  be 
in  1242.  This  date  limited  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin  until  the  time 
of  Henry  VIII.*     Only  occasionally  do  we  find  the  period  of  limitation 

'  Bk.  13,  chap.  33. 

^  *•  Select  Civil  Picas  "  No.  4. 

3  See  No.  6  in  this  Vol.,  and  Nos.  185  and  197  in  "Select  Civil  Pleas''  (Seld. 
Sec).  *  *•  Select  Civil  Pleas,"  Nos.  179  and  236. 

*  See  **Bracton's  Note  Book,"  Vol.  III.,  p.  230,  where  the  ordinance  is  given. 
It  corresponds  with  what  is  generally  known  as  cap.  8  of  ihe  Statute  of  Merton. 

**  St.  of  Westm.  I.,  c.  39;  *•  Hist,  of  English  Law,"  Vol.  II.,  p.  51  note. 


INTBODDCTION. 


Ixv 


expressly  mentioned  upon  the  rolls.  As  a  rule  ihe  clerk  expresses  it  by 
a  compendious  "  etc" 

The  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  was  ihe  remedy  of  the  heir  of  one 
who  has  died  seised,  otherwise,  of  course,  than  for  a  life  estale.  If  the 
ancestor  died  so  seised,  whether  rightly  or  wrongly,  did  not  matter,  and 
within  the  time  of  limitation,  the  heir  was  entitled  to  seisin  as  against 
e»er>-body  else,  even  though  someone  had  legally  a  better  right  to  the 
land.  Such  a  right  could  again  only  be  established  by  another  form 
of  action.  The  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  concerned  itself  merely  with 
pmsession.  This  form  of  action  was  only  available  to  an  heir  who 
could  claim  through  father,  mother,  uncle,  aunt,  brother,  or  sister. 
"This  reslriction  of  Ihe  assize  is  curious.  There  can  be  no  principle 
of  jurisprudence  involved  in  the  denial  of  this  action  to  one  who  is 
grandson  or  cousin  of  the  ancestor  ;  a  next  heir  is  a  next  heir  however 
remote  he  may  be.  But  in  the  history  of  our  fomis  of  action  we  have 
frequently  to  notice  that  law  begins  by  providing  for  common  cases, 
and  will  often  leave  uncommon  cases  unprovided  for,  even  though  they 
fall  wilbin  an  established  principle.  In  this  particular  instance,  how- 
ever, there  is  more  to  be  said.  The  mort  d'ancestor  is  a  blow  struck 
at  feudalism  by  a  high-handed  King.  Not  only  does  it  draw  away 
business  fiom  the  seignorial  courts,  but  it  strikes  directly  at  those  lords 
who  for  one  reason  or  another  are  apt  to  seize  the  land  that  is  left 
vacant  by  the  death  of  a  tenant.  But  even  a  high-h.inded  King  must, 
as  the  phrase  goes,  draw  the  line  somewhere,  and  may  have  to  draw  it 
without  much  regard  for  legal  logic.  About  half  a  century  later,  after 
a  dispute  between  the  justices  and  the  magnates,  the  former  succeeded 
m  instituting  the  actions  of  aiel,  bes.iiel,  tresaiel,  and  cosinoge  (de 
aco,  de  proavo,  di  Iritavo,  de  (onsanguinifate)  as  supplements  for  the 
assize  of  mort  d'ancestor.'"  These  latter  actions  were  not  in  form  like 
the  assizes.  They  begin  with  a  Pritcipe  quod  reddal.  The  writ  upon 
which  the  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  was  founded  directed  the  sheriff 
10  summon  the  recognitors  to  declare  whether  A  the  father,  or,  as  the 
case  might  be,  of  the  plaintiff  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  of 
certain  land  on  the  day  of  his  death,  and  whether  he  died  within  the 
period  of  limitation  and  whether  the  plaintiff  be  his  next  heir.  That 
was  the  question  or  series  of  questions  to  he  answered  by  the  recog- 
nitors. In  this  action  the  tenant,  or  defendant,  might  essoin  himself 
twite,  but  not  ofiener.  He  might  also  vouch  a  warrantor  to  defend 
his  seisin.  The  procedure  was  therefore  not  quite  so  summary  as  that 
of  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin.  In  GlanviU's  lime  the  period  of  limita- 
tion was  fixed  at  the  first  coronation  of  Henry  II.  In  at  Hen.  III.'  it 
wag  provided  that  writs  of  mort  d'ancestor  should  not  go  behind  the 
bsi  letum  of  King  John  from  Ireland  into  England,  and  after  the 

'  "  IlisU  of  English  Law,"  VoL  II.,  pp.  56-7.         =  Sei-  anU,  note  5,  p,  Uiv. 


Ixvi  INTRODUCTION. 


Statute  of  Westminster  I,^  the  time  ran  from  the  coronation  of 
Henry  III.  Finally  it  may  be  said  of  this  action  that  it  would  lie 
in  a  case  where  the  ancestor  under  whom  the  plaintiff  claimed  was  not 
dead  but  had  assumed  the  religious  habit'  This  follows  from  what  has 
been  said  in  the  earlier  part  of  this  Introduction  as  to  the  legal  status 
of  persons  who  have  entered  religion. 

It  appears  from  one  of  the  pleas  in  this  volume  (No.  525)  that  the 
writ  of  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  did  not  run  in  Bristol.  A  charter 
of  Henry  II  was  shown  by  the  bailiffs  of  that  town  which  contained 
such  provision. 

The  assize  utrum  was  introduced  a  little  earlier  in  point  of  time 
than  the  two  assizes  discussed  above.  In  1164  the  dispute  between 
church  and  King  as  to  the  jurisdictions  of  their  respective  courts  in  the 
matter  of  land  was  adjusted  by  the  Constitutions  of  Clarendon.'  If  a 
contention  shall  arise  between  a  clerk  and  a  layman  concerning  any 
land  which  the  former  alleges  to  be  free-alms  and  the  latter  asserts  to 
be  a  lay  fee,  the  fact  shall  be  determined  by  the  voice  of  twelve  recog- 
nitors. If  they  shall  answer  the  land  is  frankalmoin,  then  the  plea 
shall  go  to  the  ecclesiastical  court ;  if  the  land  be  a  lay  fee,  then  the 
King's  court  shall  deal  with  the  cause.  Thus  the  preliminary  question 
in  such  disputes,  the  question  of  jurisdiction,  is  left  to  be  determined 
by  a  body  independent  of  either  court — the  jurors  of  the  neighbour- 
hood. They  declare  whether — utrum — the  tenement  be  free-alms  or 
lay  fee.  By  this  concession  the  church  achieved  a  position  which, 
however,  it  could  not  hold  in  its  entirety.  Between  the  time  of  Glanvill 
and  that  of  Bracton  the  King's  court  had  recovered  a  large  jurisdiction 
over  church  lands  simply  by  restricting  the  use  of  this  form  of  action. 
The  Constitutions  of  Clarendon  clearly  admitted  that  either  layman  or 
clerk  could  have  the  writ,  but  by  degrees  it  was  refused  to  all,  whether 
cleric  or  lay,  who  had  other  remedies  for  recovery  of  the  land.  If  a 
bishop  or  abbot  thought  himself  entitled  to  lands  which  were  witholden 
from  him  he  might  have  the  ordinary  writ  of  right.  He  could  plead 
that  one  of  his  predecessors  was  seised  of  it  just  as  could  a  layman. 
But  the  parish  parson  could  not  do  this.  The  land  he  enjoyed  was  not 
given  originally  10  the  parson  and  his  successors,  but  to  God  and  the 
particular  church.  This  was  something  like  the  argument.  It  resolved 
itself  into  this — (i)  no  one  can  use  the  assize  utrum  who  has  the  ordinary 
proprietary  remedies  for  the  recovery  of  the  land  ;  (2)  all,  or  almost  all, 
the  tenants  in  frankalmoin,  except  the  rectors  of  parish  churches,  have 
these  ordinary  remedies  j  (3)  the  assize  utrum  is  essentially  the  parson's 
remedy.* 

^  3  Edward  I.,  cap.  39. 

2  No.  208  in  '*  Select  Civil  Picas  "  (Seld.  Soc.)  is  an  instance. 

'  Cap.  ix.  *  See  "  Hist,  of  English  Uw,"  Vol.  I,  pp.  226-8. 


INTRODUCTION.  Ixvii 


The  last  of  the  group  of  lesser  assizes,  the  assize  of  darrein  present- 
ment, the  assisa  de  ultima  presentatione,  bore  a  close  analogy  to  the 
assize  of  novel  disseisin.  It  was  the  remedy  of  the  claimant  to 
possession  of  an  advowson,  to  the  right  of  presentation  to  the  church, 
just  as  the  latter  action  was  the  remedy  of  a  claimant  to  the  possession 
oi  a  tenement  In  both  cases  the  proprietary  right  as  opposed  to  the 
right  of  possession  was  determined  by  other  forms  of  action.  As  the 
claimant  to  a  tenement  had  his  writ  of  right  so  the  claimant  to  an 
advowson  could  prove  his  legal  right  to  it  upon  a  writ  of  right  of 
advowson  under  which  his  adversary,  like  the  defendant  to  the  writ  of 
right  to  land,  might  choose  between  the  duel  and  the  grand  assize.  On 
the  assize  of  darrein  presentment  the  analogy  to  the  seisin  of  the  land 
was  the  last  presentation.  The  simple  question  to  be  answered  by  the 
twelve  recognitors  was.  Who  presented  the  last  parson  who  is  now  dead 
to  the  church  of  such  a  place  which  is  now  vacant  and  of  which  A  claims 
the  advowson  ?  If  the  recognitors  answered  in  favour  of  A  he  succeeded 
and  could  present  He  might  even  have  no  right  on  his  side.  He  might 
have  granted  away  the  advowson  since  the  previous  presentation ;  but  if 
the  simple  question  put  to  the  jurors  were  answered,  without  more,  the 
question  of  right  would  never  have  arisen.  Another  action  would  have 
to  be  begun  to  decide  that  Thus  it  came  about  very  early  that  excep- 
tions or  special  pleas  were  allowed  to  a  defendant  upon  this  assize, 
exceptions  which  went  in  bar  of  the  assize  or  led  to  the  turning  of  the 
assize  into  a  jury  to  determine  some  particular  question,  such  for 
example  as  the  existence  of  a  charter  transferring  the  advowson.  After 
12 1 7  assizes  of  darrein  presentments  were  to  be  decided  by  the  justices 
of  the  bench,  except  when  there  was  a  general  eyre.*  This  was  an 
exception  to  the  rule  that  the  lesser  assizes  were  taken  before  the 
justices  of  assize. 

So  much  for  the  possessory  actions.  Now  let  us  consider  the 
proprietary  remedy,  the  action  in  which  a  claimant  to  a  freehold  would 
seek  to  show  his  title  apart  from  possession.  This  was  the  writ  of  right 
The  action  was  b^un  in  the  seignorial  court  upon  a  royal  writ  directed 
to  the  lord  bidding  him  to  hold  the  demandant  to  full  right  to  the 
tenement  which  he  claimed  to  hold  of  the  lord  by  such  and  such  ser\'ice, 
and  unless  the  lord  did  so  the  sheriff  should.' 

As  a  rule  the  action  was  not  there  determined.  It  was  easy  to 
remove  it  to  the  county  court  and  thence  to  the  King's  court  If  the 
tenant  chose  to  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize  instead  of  accepting 
battle  the  action  could  only  go  to  the  King's  court  The  demandant's 
claim  to  the  land  was  as  of  his  ''  right  and  inheritance."  He  had  to 
all^e  that  he  or  some  ancestor  of  his  was  seised  during  the  prescribed 

*  Second  Charter  of  Hen.  III.,  Art.  15. 
'^  Glanv.,  Bk.  12,  chap.  5. 


Ixvili  INTRODUCTION. 


period  of  limitation  not  only  **as  of  fee,"  but  "as  of  right,"  and  he 
must  offer  battle  by  himself  or  by  some  champion  who,  theoretically, 
must  be  able  to  testify  to  such  seisin  of  his  own  knowledge  or  from 
what  his  father  had  told  him.  The  tenant,  that  is  the  name  for  the 
defendant,  may  deny  the  demandant's  case  and  put  himself  upon  the 
duel  or  upon  the  King's  grand  assize.  If  the  latter  the  recognitors  will 
decide  which  of  the  two  parties  has  the  greater  right  to  the  land.  In 
course  of  time  it  became  possible  for  the  tenant  to  put  in  some  excep- 
tion, or  special  plea  to  the  suit.  The  period  of  limitation  was  fixed  in 
1236  as  the  time  of  Henry  II.*  Prior  to  that  year  the  time  of  Henry  I. 
limited  the  period  since  which  seisin  must  be  proved. 

The  grand  assize,  to  which  reference  has  so  often  been  made  above, 
was  another  of  the  inventions  of  Henry  II.  In  addition  to  his  direction 
that  no  one  should  be  compelled  to  answer  for  his  freehold  without  a 
royal  writ,*  he  decreed  that  in  a  proprietary  action  for  a  free  tenement 
the  tenant  might  have  the  action  removed  to  the  royal  court  and  might 
have  the  whole  question  of  right  determined  by  the  answer  of  twelve 
recognitors  of  the  neighbourhood.  This  was  the  grand  assize  the 
virtues  of  which  were  so  highly  extolled  by  Glanvill.'  By  means  of  this 
royal  boon,  he  says,  the  risks  of  the  duel  are  avoided,  there  is  less  delay 
because  there  are  fewer  essoins,  it  is  better  to  have  the  oaths  of  twelve 
men  than  the  testimony  of  one  in  the  duel,  and  so  on.  A  boon  it  was 
no  doubt  to  defending  parties,  to  the  people  in  possession  of  the  land. 
It  was  not  so  much  of  a  boon  to  the  claimant.  So  soon  as  a  tenant 
had  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize  he  sued  out  a  writ  of  peace  to 
stay  the  proceedings  in  the  lord's  court.  Thenceforward  the  plea 
proceeded  in  the  court  of  the  King. 

There  was  another  class  of  actions,  which  occupied  an  intermediate 
position  between  the  indubitably  possessory  assizes  and  the  indubitably 
proprietary  writ  of  right.  "  The  basis  for  this  superstructure  is  found 
in  the  simple  writ  of  Praecipe  quod  reddat^  which  is  the  commencement 
of  a  proprietary  action  that  is  to  take  place  from  the  first  in  the 
King's  court.  That  writ  bids  the  tenant  give  up  the  land  which  the 
demandant  claims,  or  appear  in  court  to  answer  why  he  has  not  done 
so.  All  the  new  writs  have  this  in  common,  that  they  add  some  defi- 
nite suggestion  of  a  recent  flaw  in  the  tenant's  title.  This  they  do  by 
the  phrase  *  in  quam  terrain  non  habuit  ingressum  nisi.*  The  tenant, 
it  is  alleged,  had  no  entry  into  the  land  except  in  a  certain  mode,  which 
mode  will  be  described  in  the  writ,  and  is  one  incapable  of  giving  him  a 
good  title.  The  object  of  this  formula  is  to  preclude  the  tenant  from 
that  mere  general  denial  of  the  demandant's  title  which  would  be  appro- 

^  afi/e,  note  5,  p.  Ixiv.  ^  See  Glanv.,  Bk.  12,  chap.  2  an  I  25. 

^  Bk.  2,  chap.  7. 


INTRODUCTION.  Ixix 


priate  in  a  writ  of  right  and  to  force  him  to  answer  a  certain  question 
about  his  own  title — *  Did  you  or  did  you  not  come  to  the  land  in  the 
manner  that  I  have  suggested  ? '  If  the  tenant  denies  the  suggestion, 
then  here  is  a  question  of  fact  that  ought  to  be  sent  to  the  jury."*  These 
were  the  writs  of  entry  of  which  there  are  many  examples  in  this  book. 
One  of  them  was  the  writ  of  entry  sur  disseisin,  a  supplement  to  the 
assize  of  novel  disseisin  to  meet  the  case  of  change  of  circumstances  by 
death  of  a  party  or  feoffment  by  a  disseisor.  This  was  always  regarded 
as  a  possessory  action.  But  what  of  the  others  ?  Were  they  to  be  treated 
as  possessory  or  as  proprietary  or  as  a  mixture  of  both  ?  Suffice  it  to  say 
different  men  held  different  opinions. 

If  a  person,  after  being  duly  summoned,  failed  to  appear  up  to  the 
fourth  day  after  that  fixed  for  the  return  of  the  writ,  he  became  liable 
to  punishment  as  a  defaulter  or  to  process  of  one  kind  or  another  to 
compel  his  appearance  on  some  future  day,  unless  he  could  present 
some  sufficient  excuse  or  essoin,  as  it  was  called.     The  practice  of 
essoining  is  treated  minutely  and  at  great  length  by  Bracton,  and  was 
of  vast  importance  in  the  judicial  proceedings  of  the  time.     The  pro 
cedure  was  exceedingly  complicated,  so  much  so  that  it  would  be 
a  hopeless  task  to  deal  with  it  in  this  place.     Those  who  may  desire 
a  more  intimate  acquaintance  with  the  subject  will  find  it  concisely 
summarised  in  Reeves'  "  History  of  the  English  Law."*    A  very  few 
words  must  suffice  for  our  present  purpose.     One  common  excuse 
for  non-appearance  was  being  in  servitio  regis — on    the    service   of 
the   King — generally  testified  by  a  writ  or   mandate  of  the   King 
himself.      Another,  and    perhaps   the   commonest  of  all,  was   the 
essoin  de  tnalo  vcniendi^  of  some  bodily  infirmity  occurring  on  the 
way  to  the  court.     Essoins  were  also  allowed  for  unavoidable  de- 
tention on  the  road,  such  as  a  flood,  a  broken  bridge,  and  the  like, 
and  these  causes  of  non-appearance  were  frequently  accepted  under 
the  essoin  dt  malo  veniendi?     A  person  might  also  be  essoined  as 
beyond  the  seas,  a  special  form  of  excuse  which  was  controlled  by 
rules  peculiar  to  itself.     Again,  a  man  might  be  on  a  pilgrimage  to 
St.  James  of  Compostella,  or  to  the  Holy  Land.     Or  he  might  plead 
sickness  confining  him  to  his  bed.     This  was  the  essoin  de  mnlo  lecti. 
It  was  much  more  solemn  business  than  the  other  essoins.     If  a  party 
claimed  it,  and  it  was  generally  only  allowed  in  proceedings  under  a 
writ  of  right,  in  the  proprietary  as  opposed  to  the  possessory  action, 
the  justices  sent  four  knights  to  view  the  sick  man  and  to  see  whether 
he  was  really  so  infirm  as  he  claimed  to  be.     If  he  were  not,  the 
knights  were  instructed  to  give  him  a  day  for  appearance  before  the 

1  **  Hist  of  English  Law,"  Vo'.  II.,  p.  63. 
*  Ed.  VV.  F.  Finlason,  Vol.  I,  pp.  402-409. 
^  See  BrittoD,  liv.  vi,  ch.  6. 


Ixx  INTRODUCTION. 


justices ;  if  he  were,  they  ordered  him  to  appear  at  some  appointed 
place,  usually  the  Tower  of  London,  a  year  and  day  from  the  time 
of  making  the  view.  At  the  Tower  or  other  appointed  place  he 
would  be  given  another  and  short  day  for  appearance  before  the 
court.  If  the  essoin  de  tnalo  lecti  were  duly  allowed  the  person  so 
excused  could  not  venture  beyond  his  house  during  the  time  allowed 
him  under  pain,  if  found  abroad,  of  being  arrested  by  his  opponent 
and  of  losing  his  land  as  a  defaulter  for  breaking  his  essoin.  We 
may  well  imagine  how  close  a  prisoner  he  might  often  be  kept  by  an 
adversary  incensed  by  the  delay  of  his  suit.  Last,  there  was  the 
excuse  of  vill-sickness,  where  the  party  had  reached  the  court  and 
had  appeared,  but  before  any  answer  to  the  suit,  had  been  taken  ill  in 
the  town  where  the  court  sat  and  was  unable  to  attend.  His  duty 
was  to  send  every  day  for  four  days  two  different  messengers  to  the 
court,  and  on  the  fourth  day  the  justices  sent  to  him  four  knights  to 
accept  an  attorney  from  him  "  to  gain  or  to  lose." 

The  excuse  was  presented  to  the  justices  by  a  person  sent  for  the 
purpose,  the  essoiner,  who  declared  the  facts  and  pledged  his  faith 
that  his  principal  would  come  at  some  future  day  and  warrant  the 
truth  of  the  essoin  by  his  oath.  An  infant  could  not  essoin  himself, 
because  he  could  not  swear  or  warrant  the  essoin.  Nor  were  essoins 
allowed  in  all  cases.  None  lay  on  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin,  nor 
after  the  person's  land  had  been  taken  into  the  King's  hand  for  default, 
nor  for  one  whose  presence  the  sheriff  had  been  ordered  to  enforce. 
In  many  other  cases  an  excuse  for  non-appearance  was  not  allowed. 

The  time  allowed  to  an  excused  person  varied.  Apparently  he 
could  not  have  less  than  fifteen  days ;  but  upon  the  simple  essoin  de 
ultra  mare  there  was  a  delay  of  forty  days  at  least,  and  one  ebb  and 
one  flood  of  the  tide.  If  the  party  was  in  some  very  distant  place,  as 
in  Gascony  or  in  Spain,  the  time  might  be  extended  in  the  discretion 
of  the  justices.  For  a  simple  pilgrimage  to  the  Holy  Land  a  year  and 
day  was  the  usual  period.  For  what  was  called  a  "  general  passage  " 
thither  the  plea  remained  sine  die.  This  latter  privilege  was  granted 
to  those  who  were  cnue  signati,  and  it  seems  to  have  been  allowed  in 
consequence  of  a  papal  decree  which  declared  that  until  death  or 
actual  return  of  such  persons  all  their  property  should  remain  entire 
and  untouched. 

As  an  illustration  of  the  manner  in  which  the  system  of  essoining 
worked  in  practice  I  may  refer  to  the  proceedings  between  John  le 
Rus  and  Robert  de  Columbariis.  John  had  commenced  his  action  to 
recover  three  carucates  of  land  in  Lamyet  by  writ  of  right  at  Westmin- 
ster. The  date  does  not  appear,  but  we  find  that  Robert  essoined 
himself  de  tnalo  veniendi  at  Cambridge  on  the  quindene  of  Michael- 
mas, 1247.     He  was  excused  until  the  octave  of  St  Martin,  when  he 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ix 


was  to  appear  at  HuDtingdon.  Apparently  he  had  already  demanded 
a  view  of  the  land  claimed;  in  other  words  had  required  John  to  point 
out  on  the  spot  the  land  he  claimed,  and  that  the  view  had  been  had 
(No.  1337)-  When  the  justices  came  to  Huntingdon  Robert  was  not 
there;  He  sent  to  say  that  he  was  sick  in  bed  in  Dorsetshire,  and 
claimed  an  essoin  de  malo  Ueti.  The  justices  did  what  was  usual — 
sent  four  knights  to  look  at  him  in  his  house,  and  if  they  did  not  find 
him  confined  lo  his  bed  he  was  bidden  to  attend  at  Chelmsford  on  the 
octave  of  the  Purification  (No.  1344).  The  knights  found  him  tn  the 
coodition  alleged,  and  gave  him  an  extension  of  time  for  a  year  and  a 
day  from  the  date  of  their  inspection,  St.  Agatha's  Day,  and  they  rode 
to  Hertford  to  report  the  fact  lo  the  justices  on  the  Sunday  after 
Easter,  1348  (No.  134;).  Rol»ert  had  then  a  good  respite.  We  next 
hear  of  him  at  the  Tower  of  London,  where  he  arrived  to  satisfy  the 
conditions  of  his  excuse.  Bui  it  was  a  serious  question  whether  he 
had  not  come  a  day  too  late.  He  relied  on  the  fact  that  it  was  leap 
year.  The  constable  referred  the  question  to  the  justices  at  Win- 
Chester,  and  there  the  matter  was  argued  soon  after  Hilary,  1248-9 
(No.  1376).  Robert  was  not  exhausted  yet.  At  Wilton  he  managed 
to  gel  further  lime  until  one  month  after  Easter  (No.  1385),  and  a  still 
futBier  day  was  given  to  the  morrow  of  Trinity  (No.  i39t).  By  this 
time,  however,  the  King  had  been  approached,  probably  by  John,  with 
the  result  that  the  justices  were  ordered  to  remit  the  whole  of  the 
proceedings  to  the  King  at  Westminster,  and  the  parties  were  told 
that  they  must  be  there  on  the  quindene  of  Michaelmas  (No.  1395). 
They  seem,  however,  10  have  had  enough  of  litigation.  Before  the 
day  fixed  for  their  appearance  at  Westminster  they  compromised  the 
dispute.  John  got  his  land  and  more,  and  he  paid  Robert  ^^aoo. 
This  was  not  an  exceptional  case.  Jt  is  true  that  more  indulgence 
was  allowed  in  respect  of  time  where  a  question  of  right  as  opposed  to 
one  of  mere  seisin  was  to  be  determined.  But  writs  of  right  were 
pretty  common.  It  is  not  difficult  to  imagine  the  trouble  and 
hard  riding  these  adjournments  from  county  to  county  must  have 
occasioned  to  all  concerned ;  and,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  we  find  no 
mention  of  costs  awarded  to  a  party,  unless  No.  1464  can  be  said  to  be 
such  a  case. 

Of  "  fines,"  or  agreements  between  parties  for  the  compromise  of 
their  suits,  very  little  need  be  said.  They  are  very  numerous  in  this 
volume,  and  most  of  them  can  he  traced  to  the  "  feet  of  fines  "  which 
have  been  translated  and  published  in  an  earlier  volume  by  the 
Somerset  Record  Society.  But  some  do  not  appear  there,  and  I  have 
found  that,  as  a  rule,  where  the  substance  of  the  compromise  was 
stated  upon  the  rolls  of  the  court,  no  corresponding  foot  of  fine  is 
to  be  found.     As  Eome  examples  Nos,  601,  644,  653,  715,  and  1505 


Ixxil  INTRODUCTION. 


may  be  cited.  I  am  not  aware  that  this  practice  has  been  previously 
observed  upon.  It  would  seem  now  that  a  search  for  a  particular  fine 
through  the  files  of  feet  of  fines  may  not  always  be  sufficient.  If  it  be 
not  found  in  the  usual  place  it  would  appear  that  the  rolls  of  the 
justices  should  also  be  examined.  In  this  volume  we  find  mention  of 
a  fine  levied  in  an  inferior  court,  that  of  John,  Count  of  Mortain, 
afterwards  King  of  England  (No.  293). 

It  is  a  matter  for  some  regret  that  it  is  not  possible  accurately  to 
compare  the  value  of  money  in  the  13th  century  with  that  of  the 
present  day.  When  we  see  that  a  man  was  amerced  to  the  extent  of 
I  mark  we  can  hardly  do  more  than  guess  what  the  equivalent  for 
the  13X.  4i/.  would  be  in  money  of  our  day.  It  is  at  best  mislead- 
ing to  say  that  money  was  worth  then  so  many  times  more  than 
it  is  now.  The  difficulty  is  to  find  a  trustworthy  standard  of  com- 
parison. The  prices  of  commodities  fluctuated  for  a  variety  of 
reasons.  The  price  of  gold  itself  was  liable  to  rise  and  fall  at  short 
intervals,  and  it  depended  much  on  local  circumstances.  The  currency 
of  the  time  of  Henry  III  was,  with  but  very  trifling  exception,  a  silver 
currency.  Let  us  convert  some  prices  of  that  period  into  their 
equivalents  of  pure  silver,  and  again  convert  the  latter  into  equivalents 
of  modern  money.  The  penny  of  Henry  III  contained  20*62  of  our 
troy  grains  of  pure  silver.  The  modern  shilling  weighs  87*27  grains, 
of  which  80*73  grains  are  of  pure  silver.  From  1261  to  1270  the 
average  price  of  wheat  was  1167*89  grains  of  pure  silver,  or  4s,  S^d. 
per  quarter.*  This  quantity  of  silver  would  suffice  for  coining  14s,  6d., 
nearly,  of  our  currency.  Again,  between  1260  and  1270,  the  average 
cost  of  a  good  wether  was  is.  4^.,  or  329*92  grains  of  pure  silver,  which 
would  be  the  standard  allowance  for  4s,  of  tOKiay.  From  1259  to  1269 
the  average  price  of  an  ox  was  gs,  10//.,  a  sum  equivalent  to  2433*16 
grains  of  pure  silver,  which  would  suffice  now  for  the  coining  of  a  small 
fraction  over  305.  It  is  clear  that  comparisons  such  as  these  do  not 
help  us.  They  show  that  in  each  case  the  then  value  of  the  com- 
modity was  about  one-third  of  the  modern  equivalent  in  weight  of  pure 
silver,  but  the  present  values  of  the  three  things  selected  are  much 
higher  and  do  not  bear  the  like  proportionate  resemblances.  Probably, 
for  our  purpose  it  will  be  better  to  compare  the  amount  of  the  amerce- 
ment with  actual  prices  of  the  times.  Thus  we  see  that  if  a  man  were 
amerced  a  mark,  or  135.  4^.,  he  would  be  fined  to  an  equivalent  of 
nearly  three  quarters  of  wheat,  of  ten  wethers,  or  of  nearly  an  ox  and 
a-half.  Finally,  if  we  compare  wages,  we  find  that  if  the  man  amerced 
were  a  carpenter  his  fine  would  be  equivalent  to  nearly  forty-six  days' 


Thorold  Rogers,  "  History  of  Agriculture  and  Prices,"  Vol.  I. 


INTRODUCTION. 


Ixxiii 


wages  of  5^rf.  per  day.  If  he  were  a  mason  his  fine  would  equal 
sixty-four  days'  wages  of  a^rf.  per  day.' 

Noi  much  is  to  be  gleaned  from  these  rolls  which  would  throw 
light  upon  the  then  condition  of  the  county.  We  may  safely  assume, 
1  think,  that  the  eastern  parts  were  more  populated  and  more  advanced 
than  those  towards  the  west.  Much  more  civil  business  comes  before 
the  justices  from  the  former  than  from  the  latter.  We  also  hear  much 
less  of  crime  as  we  go  westward.  It  is  perhaps  too  much  to  assume 
that  the  western  folk  were  more  law-abiding.  The  probability  is  that 
they  were,  if  anything,  wilder  and  rougher,  because  further  removed 
from  civiliiring  influences.  It  may  be  that  little  or  nothing  was  heard 
of  many  criminal  acts  beyond  the  confines  of  the  far-off  vills,  and  so 
escaped  presentment  by  the  hundredors.  There  must  have  been  a 
great  temptation  to  keep  things  quiet,  and  so  save  a  twenty  or  thirty 
mile  ride  or  walk  for  the  coroner,  or  the  officer  of  the  sheriff. 

If  we  may  draw  an  inference  from  the  large  number  of  cases 
involving  questions  of  common  of  pasture  and  the  importance 
e^'identiy  attached  lo  such  rights,  however  small,  we  may  perhaps 
assume  that  Somerset  was  then,  as  now,  a  grazing  county.  We  see 
some  evidence  of  flooded  lands  about  the  Huntspill  district  and  of 

Crecautioiis  taken  against  such  troubles.  We  hear  of  a  dyke  said  to 
ave  been  raised  by  common  assent  of  the  county  against  inundation 
(No,  1451),  also  of  land  at  Edington  so  covered  by  water  that  a  view- 
could  not  be  made  {No,  t468), 

A  study  of  the  names  of  persons  will  show  that  surnames  in  the 
modern  sense  were  uncommon.  Most  of  the  "  quality  "  were  known 
by  the  aflS.x  of  a  place  name  to  their  surnames,  but  many  knights 
even  were  known  only  by  their  christian  names.  William  son  of 
Warin,  and  Roges  son  of  Simon  are  instances.  In  the  next  genera- 
tion we  hear  of  Sir  Simon  Roges.  A  word  of  caution  may  not  be  out 
of  place  here.  It  must  not  be  taken  for  granted  that  several  persons 
having  the  same  place  affix  were  necessarily  of  the  same  family.  The 
people  in  a  lower  condition  of  life  were  often  described  by  their  trades 
or  occupations,  but  we  find  amongst  this  class  some  distinct  surnames 
and  not  a  few  nicknames—"  Hastevilain,"  "  Stoneithewall,"  "  Swele 
by  the  bone,"  "  Bindevill,"  "  Godesblescinge,"  "  Goseberd,"  are 
instances  of  the  latter.  No.  999  shows  the  development  of  the 
surname.  "John  le  Neweman,"  probably  a  new  comer  into  the  vill, 
is  also  called  "John  Neweman  of  Sutton."  Neweman  will  become 
our  Newrnan  in  time,  and  pass  from  father  to  son. 

The  rolls  themselves  call  for  a  few  words.     Unlike  the  Patent  and 
Qose  Rolls,  which  are  bands  of  parchment  often  of  great  length,  made 
'  Tbtsc  rails  ol  wages  are  taken  from  "Hisioryor  Agriculture  and  riice:<," 
Vol.  I,  p.  315, 


Ixxiv  INTRODUCTION. 


by  stitching  the  top  of  one  membrane  to  the  foot  of  its  predecessor, 
the  rolls  of  the  courts  of  Common  Law  are  merely  groups  of 
membranes  attached  together  at  the  heads.  The  plate  prefixed  to 
this  volume  shows  one  such  membrane  full  size.  The  original  is  in 
exceedingly  good  condition,  and  the  writing  is  distinct  and  legible.  It 
must  not  be  supposed  that  all  the  rolls  are  so  well  written  or  so  well 
preserved  as  this  example. 

In  this  volume  the  use  of  dots  thus,  ....  indicates  that 
something  is  quite  illegible  or  is  wanting  by  destruction  of  the  parch- 
ment. Words  within  square  brackets  [  ]  are  not  in  the  original,  but  are 
suggested  by  me  as  necessary  or  useful  to  the  sense.  Where  passages 
are  obscure  or  where  it  is  otherwise  expedient  to  give  the  original 
I^tin  the  extracts  are  enclosed  within  curved  brackets  (  ).  Marginal 
entries  are  referred  to  in  the  footnotes  wherever  they  are  more  than 
common  form,  or  repetitions  of  something  in  the  pleas.  The  spelling 
of  proper  names  of  persons  and  places  has  been  followed  literally, 
except  that  christian  names  have  been  anglicized  and  the  names  of  a 
few  places  such  as  Winchester  and  Bath  have  been  modernised.  It 
would  perhaps  have  been  better  to  have  continued  to  use  the  original 
u  in  the  names  of  persons  and  places  instead  of  substituting  v  there- 
for. It  is  conceivable  that  some  inaccuracy  may  have  crept  in  in 
consequence,  but  I  am  not  aware  of  any. 

In  conclusion,  I  may  say  that  I  am  conscious  that  the  work  is  not 
free  from  imperfections.  The  materials  have  been  but  rough-hewn 
from  the  great  quarry.  They  are  now,  it  is  hoped,  available  for  the 
more  refined  handling  of  others,  and  may  perhaps  help  to  the  better 
understanding  of  early  English  history. 

C  £.  xi.  G.  xi. 


APPENDIX   A. 

The  Hundreds  of  Somerset. 

(Page  xxviii.) 

This  table  shows  to  some  extent  the  changes  which  were  made  in  the 
hundredal  divisions  of  the  county.  It  comprises  lists  of  the  hundreds  in  1084, 
in  1225,  and  1242-3  (Henry  III.),  in  1280  (Edw.  I.),  and  at  the  present  time. 
The  names  of  the  hundreds  alone  are  taken  as  a  guide ;  no  attempt  is  made  to 
trace  geographical  identity. 


1 

In  A.D.  1084.^ 

Roll  No,  755, 

Roll  No,  756, 

1 
Roll  No,  759,    I 

Modem:  from 

A.D.  1225. 

A.D.  1242-3. 

A.D.  128a 

1 
1 

Collimon, 

Abcdiccha 

Abbedik 

Abbedik 

Abbedick 

Abdick    and    Bui- 

ston. 
Andersfield. 

Andretesfdt 

Andredesfeld'   ... 

Andredesfeld     ... 

Andretlesfeld  ... 

Bada       

Bath       

X^ttlll              •  •  •                 • •  • 

Balh  forinsecum 

Bath  forum. 

Betministia 

Bedministre 

Bedministr' 

(app.  as  Manor). 

Beraestan* 

Bednestane 

Bnestan 

Bemstone. 

Bolestana 

Bulestan' 

Bulestan 

Bulstannc 

(above). 

Briwetona 

Briwton* 

Bniyton' 

Breuton 

Bruton. 

Bninetoiia. 

Cainesham 

Keynesham 

Keynesham 

Keynesham 

Keynsham. 

Caatetooa 

Kantinton 

Caninton 

Kanynton 

Cannington. 

Karenton 

Karemtun' 

Karhempton 
(app.  as  Borough). 

Carhampton. 

Cctdre 

•••                 •••                 ••• 

Ccddrc. 

Chinesmoresdone 

Kinemeredun    .. 

Kinmersdon 

Kynemeresdon  ... 

Kilmersdon. 

Coodecoma. 

Crocha 

Cnik*      

Cruk'      

Cruke     

Crewkcrne. 

Cui 

Chiw      

Chyu      

Cheu      

Chew. 

Ciw-etona 

Chiwton* 

Chyuton 

Chyutone 

Chewton. 

Cnngresbeiia 

■•■                 ••■                 ••• 

(app.  as  Manor). 

(app.  as  Manor). 

Frome    ... 

Frome    ... 

Frome 

Frome. 

GireLa 

•••                 •••                 ••• 

•••                 •••                 ■•• 

•••                 •••                 ••■ 

(below). 

liaiecliva 

Hareclivc 

Hareclive 

Ilareclyve 

Hareclive  cum 
Bedminster. 

Haretuma 

Harcthurn 

Horelhyme 

Ilorthume 

Horethome. 

Hunesbeige^ 

Hundesburg 

Hundcsbergh    ... 

Hundesberwe    ... 

Houndsborough, 
Berwick  and 
Coker. 

Hunespilla 

•••                 •••                 ••• 

•••                 •••                 ••• 

Ilonespill 

Huntspill  cum 
Puriton. 

Limt  or  Liet  alias 
0)chra. 

Kokre    

Cokcr     

Koker 

(above). 

Locheslda. 

ManehefVa. 

1 

Mdtoche 

Mertok 

Merttok... 

Mertok 

Martock. 

Milvertona 

Milvertone 

Milverton 

Mulvertone 

.   Milverton. 

*  G>mpiled  from  Eyton,  **  Somerset  Domesday."     It  is  not  clear  that  this  list  is  exhaustive  ; 
I  give  it  therefore  with  all  rescr\'e. 

'  QtucrTt  part  of  Givela  at  this  date,  together  wiih  Ilundcslerc  and  Tintehellc. 


I XXVI 

APPENDIX. 

The  Hundred  of  Somerset— r^«/!r«i^^. 

In  A.D.  1084.^ 

Roll  No.  755, 

A.D.  1225. 

Roll  No,  756, 

A.D.  1242-3. 

RoU  No.  759, 

A.D.  1280. 

Modem:  from 
CoUinson, 

Nortchori 

Norhtcur' 

Nortkuri 

Northcurey       .- 

Curry  North. 
North  Petherton. 

Nortpedret 

Norhtperiton*    ... 

Norperton 

Northperton 

Pipeministra. 

Pitney     

•••                 •••                 ••• 

•••                 •••                 ••• 

•»«                 ••«                 ••• 

Pitney. 

Porberia 

Portburi 

Porebii' 

Portebyr 

Portbury. 

Ringoltdeswea. 

Stane*     

Stanes 

La  Stane 

Stane 

Stone  and  YeoTil. 

Sudbrent 

Brente  (see  No. 

(app.  as  Manor  ? 

(app.  as  Manor). 

Brent  cum  Wring- 

220) 

see  No.  1063). 

ton. 

Sumbretone 

Sumerton 

Sumerton' 

Sumertone  forin- 
secum. 

Somerton. 

Sutperetona 

Sutperton' 

Superton' 

Suthperetone 

South  Petherton. 

Tantona 

Tanton  ... 

Taunton 

Taunton 

Taunton  and  Taun- 
ton Dean. 

Tintehelle" 

TintelhiU 

Tintehull 

Tyntenhull 

TintinhuU. 

Torleberga. 

Wellewe 

Wellewe 

Welwe 

Welewe 

Wellow. 

Willctona 

Wileton* 

Wyleton 

Wyliton 

Williton     Free- 
manors 

Winesfort 

•••                 •■•                 ••• 

(app.  as  Manor). 

Wynterstok 

Whytston 

(app.  as  Manor). 
Wynterstok 

Winestoc 

Wintestok 

Wintersloke. 

Witestana 

Whitstan* 

Whytstane 

Whitstone. 

Bp.  Giso'sland, 

called  by  Mr.  Ey- 

ton  "the  Bishop's 
hundred,"        in- 

0 

cluded — 

Cingesberia    ... 

Kingesbir* 

Kingesbir 

Kyngcsbyr 

Kingsbury,      East 
and  West. 

Walintone 

(with  Lidyard)  ... 

Welinton 

Wellington. 

Welle 

Welles 

Well'      

Wells  foriosecum 

Wells  Forum. 

Tatton  ... 
Wyvelescome... 

Jatton     

Yhatton 

Yattone. 

(with  Lidyard). 

Banewell      (see 

No.  385). 

Bnineland 

(app.  as  Manor) 

(app.  as  Manor). 

Catthesasse 

Catessasse 

Catetes&ishe 

Catash. 

Dulverton 

Dulverton. 

(app.  as  Manor). 

Lidyard. 

Norton 

Norton 

Norton 

Norton  Ferrers. 

Witheleg 

Whytelegh' 

Why  tele 

Whitley. 

Wrington. 

Melles. 

Glaston  12  hides. 

^  Compiled  from  Eyton,  **  Somerset  Domesday."     It  is  not  clear  that  this  list  is  exhaustive  ; 
give  it  therefore  with  all  reserve. 
-  Qtftcre,  part  of  Givela  at  this  date,  together  with  Hundesberc  and  Tintehelle. 


APPENDIX  B. 

Customs  of  Englishry. 

(Page  Ix.) 

The  following  "customs"  presented  by  the  counties  named  are 
taken  from  eyre  rolls,  all  of  which  date  from  the  reign  of  Henry  III. 
except  where  otherwise  stated.     The  Latin  has  been  extended. 

Bedfordshire  :  '*  Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto  cotnitatu  per  unum 
ex  parte  patris  et  unum  ex  parte  matris  et  tantummodo  de  mascuiiSj  et 
presentatur  tarn  de  infortuniis  quam  de  murdrisJ*  Assize  Roll,  No.  4, 
m.  26. 

Berkshire  :  "  Coronatores presentant  quod  Englescheria  presentatur 
in  isto  cotnitatu  per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  alium  ex  parte  matris  et  tam 
de  mare  quam  de  femina  dum  modo  femina  sit  majoris  etatis  quam  de 
xif^  annis  et  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  murdris**  Assize  Roll,  No.  37, 
m.  28.  ^^  Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  tam  de  masculisquam 
defeminibus  et  de  omni  etate  per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  unum  ex  parte 
matris^  et  similiter  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  murdris"  Assize  Roll, 
No.  38,  m.  22. 

Cornwall  :  "  Totus  comitatus  recordatur  quod  nulla  Englescheria 
presentatur  in  comitatu  isto  nee  umquam  presentata  fuit  neque  de  feloniis 
nee  de  infortuniis  T     Assize  Roll,  No.  iii,  m.  22  (12  Edw.  I.). 

Devonshire  :  ^*'  Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  per  duos  ex 
parte  patris  et  duos  ex  parte  matris  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  feloniis 
set  de  femina  non  presentatur  nee  de  aliquo  submerso  in  mari  nee  de  aliquo 
infra  septem  annos'^    Assize  Roll,  No.  176,  m.  28. 

Dorsetshire  :  "  Totus  comitatus  recordatur  quod  Englescheria  presen- 
tatur in  comitatu  isto  per  duos  ex  parte  patris  et  duos  ex  parte  matris  et 
tantummodo  de  masculis  et  de  etate  duodecim  annorum  et  amplius  de 
feloniis  tantum  per  concessionem  quam  dominus  rex  fecit  eidem  comitatuiP 
Assize  Roll,  No.  202,  m.  20. 

Essex  :  "  Comitatus  recordatur  quod  Englesheria  presentatur  in 
comitatu  isto  per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  unum  ex  parte  matris^  tantum^ 
modo  de  masculo  non  de  femina  et  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  feloniis^  et 
dicunt  quod  nulla  Englesheria  presentatur  de  pueris  infra  etatem  trium 
annorum^     Assize  Roll,  No.  235,  m.  2. 


Ixxviii  APPENDIX. 


Gloucestershire  :  "  Et  sciendum  quod  in  hoc  comitatu  debit  Engles- 
cheria  presentari  per  duos  ex  parte  patris  et  per  unutn  ex  parte  matris  " 
.  .  .  "  Englescheria  fuit  presentata  per  quandam  feminam  ex  parte 
matris  et  comitatus  recordatur  quod  Englescheria  non  debet  presentari  per 
feminam  et  ideo  murdrum'^  .  .  .  "/«  hundredo  isto  (Westbiria) 
nullum  est  murdrum  quia  est  ultra  Sabrinam^  ..."  nullum  mur- 
drum quia  ultra  SabrinamP  Assize  Roll,  No.  271,  mm.  10,  12^, 
and  16. 

Hampshire:  ^^  Aenglescheria  presentatur  in  comitatu  isto  per  unum 
ex  parte  patris  et  per  alium  ex  parte  matris  et  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de 
feloniisy  de  masculis  tamen  de  etate  xif^  annorum  et  amplitisP  Assize 
Roll,  No.  778,  m.  35. 

Herefordshire  :  "  Englescheria  presentatur  in  comitatu  isto  per 
unum  ex  parte  patris  et  alium  ex  parte  matris  tam  de  masculis  quam  de 
feminisy  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  feloniisP     Assize  Roll,  No.  300,  m.  22. 

Kent  :  ^^  Englecheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  tam  ex  parte  patris 
quam  ex  parte  matris  et  per  duos  ex  parte  patris  et  per  duos  ex  parte 
matris  et  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  feloniisP  Assize  Roll,  No.  361, 
m.  34. 

Leicestershire  :  "  Et  scietidum  quod  totus  comitatus  Leyc,  presentat 
quod  nulla  Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu^  immo  dicit  quod 
si  aliquis  inventus  fuerit  occisus  quod  ibi  est  murdrumP  Assize  Roll, 
No.  4SS,  m.  I. 

Lincolnshire  :  "  Compertum  est  per  rotulos  de  ultimo  itinere 
Gilberti  de  Preston  quod  totus  comitatus  alias  requisitus  fuit  coram  eo 
et  sociis  suis  in  prefato  itinere  qualiter  Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto 
comitatu  et  quod  tunc  ex  parte  totius  comitatus  fuit  responsum  quod  nulla 
Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  set  bene  concessum  fuit  per  totum 
comitatum  quod  quotiescuftque  aliquis  inventus  fuit  occisus  et  non  fuerit 
notus  tunc  de  consuetudine  antiqua  et  sine  interruptione  usitata' ibi  adjudi- 
catur  murdrum  et  hoc  tantummodo  de  mascuio  et  non  dejemtnis.  Assize 
Roll,  No.  486,  m.  I  (9  Edw  L). 

Middlesex  :  "  Sciendum  quod  Anglescheria presentatur  in  hoc  comitatu 
per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  unum  ex  parte  matris  et  si  nullus  sic  parens  ex 
parte  patris  tunc  per  duos  ex  parte  matris  et  econtrarioP  Assize  Roll, 
No.  536,  m.  6. 

Norfolk  :  "  Presentatur  in  comitatu  isto  Englescheria  tam  de  muli- 
eribus  quam  de  masculis  et  de  pueris  de  aliis  IwminibusP  Assize  Roll, 
No.  562,  m.  I. 


APPENDIX.  Ixxix 


Northamptonshire  :  "  Englescheria  presentatur  in  comitatu  isto 
per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  unum  ex  parte  matrisy  et  sciendum  quod 
Englescheria  presentatur  in  comitatu  isto  Adeo  betie  de  hominibus  qui 
mortui  fuerint  per  infortunium  quam  de  illis  qui  fuerint  occisi^  dum 
tamen  fuerint  etatis  duodecim  annorum  vel  ampliusJ^  Assize  Roll,  No. 
614,  m.  36.  "  Comitatus  recordatur  quod  Englescheria  presentatur  in 
comitatu  isto  per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  alium  ex  parte  matris  et  tam  de 
infortuniis  quam  de  feloniis  dum  tamen  sint  etatis  duodecim  annorum,^^ 
Assize  Roll,  No.  615,  m.  i 

Oxford  :    "  Englecheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  per  unum  ex 
parte  patris  et  alium  ex  parte  matris  et  presentatur  de  masadis  tantum 
set  de  illis  presentatur  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  aliis^    Assize  Roll, 
No.  700,  m.  I. 

Shropshire  :  "  Totus  comitatus  recordatur  quod  nullum  murdrum  est 
in  comitatu  isto  nee  Englescheria  presentatur  nee  aliquis  est  in  decenna,^* 
Assize  Roll,  No.  734,  m.  17. 

Somersetshire  :  "  Englescheria  presentatur  in  hoc  comitatu  per  duos 
ex  parte  patris  et  duos  ex  parte  matris  tam  de  infortuniis  quam  de  aliis  et 
de  masculis  tantum^  Assize  Roll,  No.  756,  m.  13.  "  Totus  comitatus 
recordatur  quod  Englescheria  presentatur  in  comitatu  isto  de  omnibus 
feloniis  per  unum  ex  parte  matris  et  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  hoc  de 
masculis  tantum  ultra  etatem  duodecim  annorum  et  non  infra,  Et 
quia  convictum  est  per  rotulos  ultimi  itineris  quod  Englescheria  presen- 
tatur in  comitatu  isto  per  ditos  ex  parte  patris  et  duos  et  parte  matris  de 
feloniis  et  masculis  sicut predictum  est  et  quia  falso  presentaverunt predictum 
Englescheriam  ideo  ad  judicium  de  toto  comitatu^  Assize  Roll,  No.  759, 
m.  I  (8  Edw.  I.). 

Suffolk  :  "  Englescheria  presentata  fuit  per  duos^  scilicet  unum  ex 
parte  patris  et  per  dlium  ex  parte  matris^     Roll  No.  818,  m.  46. 

Sussex  :  "  Engleseria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  per  duos^  scilicet 
per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  unum  ex  parte  matris^  Assize  Roll,  No. 
909,  m.  20. 

Warwick  :  "  In  hoc  comitatu  debet  Englescheria  presentari  per  duos 
homines  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  alium  ex  parte  matris ^  Assize  Roll, 
No.  950,  m.  I.  "^/  sciendum  quod  Englescheria  presentatur  in  comitatu 
isto  per  duos  scilicet  per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  alium  ex  parte  matris'^ 
Assize  Roll,  No.  951,  m.  i.  "/«  isto  comitatu  non  presentatur  Engle- 
sheria  et  ideo  murdrum  tam  de  .  .  .  mortuis^  Assize  Roll,  No. 
952,  m.  31^.  ^^  Et  sciendum  quod  in  comitatu  isto  non  presentatur 
Englescheria^  ideo  murdrum''  Assize  Roll,  No.  954,  m.  48.  "  Comi- 
tatus recordatur  quod  nulla  Englescheria  presentatur  in  isto  comitatu  set 


Ixxx  APPENDIX. 


quotienscufique  aliquis  inventus  fuerit  acdsus  et  non  fuerit  notus  ibi 
adjudicatur  murdrum  et  hoc  tantummodo  de  masculis  et  non  de  feminis^^ 
Assize  Roll,  No.  956,  m.  34  (13  Edw.  I.). 

Wiltshire:  ^^ Englescheria  presentatur  in  hoc  comitatu  per  tres^ 
scilicet  per  duos  ex  parte  patris  et  per  unum  et  parte  matris,^*  Assize 
Roll,  No.  996,  m.  23. 

Worcestershire:  ^^ Englescheria  presentata  est  in  isto  comitatu 
tantummodo  de  masculis  scilicet  per  unum  ex  parte  patris  et  alium  ex 
parte  matriSy  scilicet  de  etate  duodecim  annorum"  Assize  Roll,  No.  1022, 
m.  24. 

Yorkshire  :  "  Nulla  Englescheria  presentatur  in  hoc  comitatu^  idea 
nullum  murdrum^    Assize  Roll,  No.  1043,  m.  i. 


APPENDIX    C 


The  Sheriffs  of  Somerset. 


For  this  list  of  the  sherifis  down  to  the  close  of  the  period 
covered  by  this  volume,  I  am  indebted  to  the  courtesy  of  Mr.  Arthur 
Hughes  of  the  Public  Record  Office.  The  names  in  italic  are  those  of 
the  under  sheriffs. 


Date  of 
appomtmeiit  or 
Of  oomiDaiciDg 

acoount 


Name. 


I>omesdayy  at 
Survey. 


f> 


Mich. 


99 

99 


Mich. 

East 

Mich. 


*» 


[Mich. 


9> 


Mich.       1 1 29 


"55 


155 

157 
161 

163 

166 

170 

175 
182 

184 

188 

189 


Somersetshire  only. 


Wilham  de  Mohun  (p.  86). 

Baldwin  (p.  93). 

Edward,  idid, 

Somersetshire  and  Dorsetshire. 

Warin. 
Warin. 

Somersetshire  only. 
Richard  de  Monte  Alto. 

Somersetshire  and  Dorsetshire 

Richard  de  Raddona. 

Warner  de  Lisoriis. 

Robert  de  Bello  Campo. 

Gerbert  de  Perci. 

Robert  Pucherel  or  Pukerel. 

Alfred  de  Lincolnia. 

Robert  de  Bello  Campo. 

William  de  Bendeng. 

Robert  filius  Pagan i. 

Hugh  Bardulf. 

John,  count  of  Mortain.]     (Did  not  account) 


Ixxxii 


APPENDIX. 


The  Sheriffs  of  Somerset — continued. 


Date  of 

appointment  or 

of  commencing 

account. 

23  Feb. 
17  Apr. 
Mich. 

1 194 

n   ' 

Mich. 

1 196 

East 

II97 

» 

1 199 

)9 

Mich. 

1200 

is'bct 

0 
1204 

Name 


William  earl  of  Salisbury. 

William  de  Cahaignis,  son  of  Ralph  de  Cahaignis 

Waiter  Giffard, 
William  de  Cahaignis,  in  person. 
Peter  de  Schidimor  or  Scudimor. 
Robert  Belet. 

Henry  de  Stokes. 
Hubert  de  Burgo. 

Aian  de  Whittona. 
William  de  Monte  Acuto  and 
Osbert  de  Stok. 
William  Briwere. 

Ralph  de  Bray^  for  him. 
William  Malet. 

Master    Richard    de    Marisco,    archdeacon    of 
Northumberland. 

Roger  de  Peaiton, 
William  de  Harecurt. 

Richard  Pipard. 

Richard  de  Harecurt. 
Ralph  de  Bray. 
Peter  de  Maulay,  or  Malo  Lacu. 


3  Dec.  1207 

Mich.  „ 

Xmas.  1 209 

22  Nov.  1 2 12 

Mich.  1 213 

24  Jan.  12 14 

Xmas.  1 213 

Mich.  1 2 14 

27  Apr.  1215 

26  June  12 16 


14  Mar.    12 17 


Mich.  12 1 7 
20  Nov.  1 22 1 
Mich. 


1222 


Somersetshire  only. 


William  earl  of  Salisbury. 


Somersetshire  and  Dorsetshire. 

Peter  de  Maulay. 

Roger  de  Forda,  or  de  la  Forde. 

Ranulph  Ciericus, 
Roger  de  la  Forde  (died  in  office). 


APPENDIX. 


Ixxxiii 


The  Sheriffs  of  Somerset — continued. 


Date  of 
appointment  or 
oi  commencing 

account. 


Name. 


I  Feb.  1223 

Xmas.  1222 

30  Dec.  1223 
Xmas. 


»> 


East.        1225 


22  June 

1226 

10  Nov. 

1228 

Mich. 

1230 

II  July 

1232 

Mich. 

yt 

19  Apr. 

"33 

28  May 

"34 

East. 

}) 

Mich. 

)f 

18  Dec. 

"37 

Xmas. 

1238 

Mids. 

"39 

Mich. 

1240 

28  Apr. 

"49 

26  Nov. 

n 

26  May 

1250 

21  Oct. 

I251 

Mich. 

"54 

7  July 

"55 

27  Oct. 

>> 

5  Oct. 

"57 

Somersetshire  only. 


John  Russell. 

Ralph  RusseL 
Joscelin,  bishop  of  Bath. 

Luke  RusseL 

William  de  Sorewell, 


Somersetshire  and  Dorsetshire. 

William  filius  Henrici  (accounts  from  Michaelmas 

for  Somersetshire). 
Thomas  de  Cyrencestria. 

Henry  de  Campo  Florida. 
Peter  de  Rivall  (did  not  account). 

Henry  de    Campo  Florida  (for  Thomas   de 
Cyrencestria). 
Thomas  de  Cyrencestria,  in  person. 
Henry  filius  Nicolai. 
Thomas  de  Cyrencestria. 

Henry  de  Campo  Florum. 
Thomas  de  Cyrencestria,  in  person. 
Richard  de  Langford. 
Herbert  filius  Mathei. 
Jordan  Oliver. 
Hugh  de  Vivonia. 

Godfrey  de  Schidemor  (did  not  account). 
Bartholomew  Fetch. 
Henry  de  Erleg,  Ernlej^a,  or  Dernlega. 
Elias  de  Rabayn. 

Walter  de  B urges, 
John  de  Aure. 

Stephen  de  Ashton,  or  Hassetona. 
Walter  de  Burges. 


ADDENDA   ET   CORRIGENDA. 


p.  I.     For    "York"    read   "Yorkshire";    and    (line    i8)    for 
"forensic"  read  "forinsec" 
No.  la     For  "  virtage  "  read  "  virgate." 

31,  note  I.     In  Jan.  9  Henry  III,  the  King,  ordered  the  sheriff  to  make 
inquest  concerning  the  gaoler  of  Ilchester,  his  wife  and 
£unily,  who  had  betaken  themselves  to  the  church  becau^ 
a  number  of  prisoners  had  escaped  from  the  gaol  and  had 
also  taken  sanctuary.     The  sheriff  was  to  inquire  how  far 
the  gaoler  and  his  wife  and  family  were  guilty  of  abetting 
the  escape.     The  King's  order  w^as  that  uie  prisoners  who 
had  escaped  should  abjure  the  realm  **  according  to  the 
custom  of  England." — 2  "  Rot.  Claus.,"  p.  13b. 
p.  54,  tu  \    For  "  Ewdes  "  read  "  Eudes." 
p.  57,  note.     For  "  St.  Geogre"  read  "  St.  George." 
No.  192.     For  "  son  "  read  "  sons." 
No.  326.     For  "  Herbert "  read  "  Henry." 
No.  346  and  No.  808.     For  "  Lunel  "  read  "  LuveL" 

No.  3SS.     The  name  here  should  ^^  "  de  Vivone." 

No.  382  (a).     This  should  read  "upon  the  common  summons."  that  is^ 

the  general  summons  to  attend  the  eyre. 

p.  1 1 1,  notes  2  and  3.  For  "no-f-"  read  "  no  f-." 

No.  420m.  "  Angevin  "  in  place  of  "  Augevin." 

No.  489.  Substitute  "  essoiner  "y&r  "  essoniator." 

No.  565.  For  "  Stant "  read  "  Stant'." 

No.  602.  For  "  forensic  "  read  "  forinsec." 

No.  757.  For  "  gardiner  "  read  "  gardener." 

No.  771  and  No.  949.  For  "  presentation  "  read  "presentment." 

No.  821.  Substitute  "  inquest  ''for  "  inquiry." 

No.  826.  For  "  ospitali "  read  "  ospiUti." 

No.  985,  last  line.  For  **  when  "  read  "  where." 

No.  996.  For  "  Andrew  de  Munford  "  read  "  Alexander  de  Munford." 

No.  1025,  line  I.  For"  he  "  read  "  de." 

No.  1 191,  last  line.  For  "  it  is  "  read  "  they  are." 

No.  1256.  "  son  "  jA«/A/ fr«// "  daughter." 

No.  1286.  It  is  well  perhaps  to  state  that  the  names  "  Robert  Martin  " 
and  "  Robert  LuN-eny "  in  this  plea  are  so  in  the  roll. 
There  has  evidently  bien  some  alteration  in  the  entry,  for 
"  Luveny  "  is  written  over  an  erasure, 

p.  362,  line  6.  For  "  Foute  "  read  "  Fonte." 

p.  372,  note  5.  Add  "or  rye." 

No.  i486,  line  3  from     For  "  his  "  substitute  "  her." 
bottom]. 


SOMERSETSHIRE    PLEAS. 


ROLL  No.  1039.    (York.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  uncertain,  and,  to  judge  from  the  various 
indorsements  made  upon  it  in  later  times,  the  uncertainty  has  existed 
for  centuries.  The  calendar  at  present  in  use  assigns  it  to  the  time  of 
John.  There  would  seem  to  be  good  ground  to  believe  that  this 
collection  of  six  membranes  has  been  made  up  from  parts  of  separate 
rolls  of  differing  dates.  The  two  membranes  which  now  form  the  last 
in  the  roll  would  seem  to  be  of  earlier  date  than  the  rest,  possibly  of 
the  time  of  Richard  I,  to  which  period  the  compiler  of  the  **  Placitorum 
Abbreviatio"  seems  to  have  thought  it  belonged.  He  has  written 
•'  Ric.  I  "  at  the  foot  of  one  of  these  two  membranes.  The  remaining 
four  membranes  may  be  of  the  time  of  Richard  or  John.  On  Memb.  i 
there  is  a  plea  of  novel  disseisin  by  the  Abbot  of  Egleston  against 
Philip,  Bishop  of  Durham.  Philip  of  Poictiers  was  elected  Bishop  in 
1 195,  and  died  in  1208.  These  dates  will  therefore  fix  the  extreme 
limits  of  this,  the  later,  portion  of  the  roll.  The  statement  that  the 
pleas  were  taken  before  Geoffry  Fitz  Peter  does  not  help  us.  He  was 
a  justice  under  both  kings.  The  roll  contains  civil  pleas,  pleas  of  the 
crown,  and  forensic  pleas,  from  which  last  only  the  matter  from  Somerset 
is  extracted. 

Memb,  4^. 

I.  William  Dacus  is  summoned  to  be  before  our  lord  the 
King  to  show  by  what  warrant  he  holds  rents  and  lands  of  our 
lady  the  Queen,  mother  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  that  he  should 
have  [with  him]  his  warranty  and  the  arrears  of  the  rents  which 
he  owes  to  our  lady  the  Queen.  And  William  comes  and  says 
that  the  land  which  he  holds  he  holds  as  his   inheritance   {de 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


ancestrta),  and  he  confesses  that  at  one  time  he  held  tenements 
of  our  lady  the  Queen,  but  .  .  .  the  Queen  was  pleased  to 
give  the  fee  and  the  services  which  he  was  bound  to  render  to 
her  for  that  fee  to  two  of  her  servants,  to  wit  Geoffry  de  Peiters 
and  William  son  of  Reginald,  to  whom  he  afterwards  did  his 
service  by  Geoffry  de  Wauci  etc.  steward  of  our  lady  the 
Queen  who  attorned  him  to  do  his  service  to  them  and  to  hold  of 
them  and  to  them  he  always  afterwards  did  his  service  so  that 
nothing  remains  in  arrear  of  that  which  he  is  bound  to  do  to 
them.  And  Nicholas  de  Wiltesir'  comes  and  says  that  as  to 
part  of  the  service  William  was  attorned  to  the  aforesaid 
Geoffry  and  William  and  as  to  part  to  him  Nicholas  and  to 
Humphrey  the  clerk,  to  whom  he  never  afterwards  did  service 
and  that  he  was  attorned  to  them  up  to  the  day  and  term  ;  this 
he  shows.  And  William  defends  that  he  never  was  attorned  to 
him  Nicholas  and  to  him  Humphrey  of  any  service.  A  day  is 
given  them  to  hear  judgment  before  the  King  on  the  morrow 
of  mid-lent. 


ROLL  No.   1 171.    (Divers  Counties.) 

This  roll  consists  of  fifteen  membranes,  that  is  of  so  many  strips 
of  parchment,  some  of  which  are  joined  by  stitching  apparently  of  the 
date  of  the  roll.  The  numeration  is  modern.  Thus,  each  of  membranes 
3  and  12  consists  of  two  pieces.  Memb.  i  is  filled  on  both  sides  with 
essoins  and  bears  the  heading  "  Essoins  taken  at  Launceston  on  Monday 
next  after  the  feast  of  St.  Barnabas  the  Apostle  to  wit  in  the  octave 
thereof."  This  helps  us  to  the  year.  The  feast  of  St.  Bamabas  in  120  t 
was  on  Monday,  iilh  June,  the  octave  falling  on  Monday,  i8th  June 
3  John),  1 20 1.  Membs.  2  to  11  inclusive  contain  the  record  of  the 
Cornish  Eyre,  from  which  Prof.  Maitland  has  made  selections  in  his 
volume  of  the  Selden  Society's  publications  (Vol.  i,  "  Select  Pleas  of  the 
Crown,"  pp.  I  to  8).  At  the  foot  of  Memb.  3  is  the  following : — 
"  Cornish  roll  of  the  Eyre  of  Simon  de  PateshuU,  and  .  .  .  berg 
and  their  fellows  made  in  the  year  of  King  J  .  ."  Memb.  4  is 
headed — "  Assizes  taken  at  Launceston  on  Monday  next  before  the 
feast  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  (/.^.,  on  Monday,  18th  June,  if  in  1201), 
before  S.  de  PateshuU  and  E.  de  Faulconberg  and  their  fellows."  At 
the  head  of  Memb.  6  appears  "Before  Eustace  de  Faulconberg." 
Memb  9  bears  the  heading— "Pleas  taken  at  Launceston  by  Richard 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Fleming,  John  de  Briwer',  John  son  of  Richard."  The  backs  of 
Membs.  9,  10,  and  11  are  blank.  Both  sides  of  Memb.  12  are  filled 
with  pleas  and  assizes  of  Dorset,  Somerset,  and  Cornwall,  taken  at 
Taunton.  Memb.  13  is  devoted  to  essoins,  and  its  back  is  blank. 
Memb.  14  and  part  of  Memb.  15  contain  pleas  of  the  crown  taken  by 
the  King  himself,  and  Memb.  15  concludes  with  a  list  of  amercements. 
The  titles  which  are  written  on  Membs.  12  to  15  appear  in  their  proper 
places  in  the  following  translation  of  all  the  entries  relating  to  the 
county  of  Somerset  contained  in  the  roll. 

It  is  well  perhaps  to  condescend  to  these  details,  because  it  has 
been  doubted  whether  the  whole  of  this  roll  can  be  said  with  certainty 
to  be  of  the  3rd  year  of  John,  a  date  which  has  been  assigned  to  it  by 
an  endorsement  in  a  more  modern  hand,  and  which  is  certainly  correct 
as  to  part  of  the  roll.     Prof.  Maitland,  who  has  also  made  some  selec- 
tions from  the  pleas  taken  at  Wells  ("Select   Pleas  of  the  Crown," 
pp.  75-80),  says :  "  The  date  of  these  cases  is  somewhat  uncertain.     They 
occur  at  the  end  of  a  Cornish  Eyre  roll  of  A.R.  3,  Coram  Rege  Roll 
No.  9,  and  are  said  to  have  been  heard  coram  rege  on  Thursday  next 
after  St.  George's  day.     It  does  not  appear  from  Hardy's  Itinerary  that 
John  was  ever  at  Wells  soon  after  St.  George's  day  (23  April).     In 
A.R.  14  he  was  there  on  the  Thursday  next  after  Sf.  Gret^orfs  day,  and 
to  write  Georgii  in  mistake  for  Gregorii  would  be  easy ;  but  these  cases 
apparently  belong  to  an  earlier  time,  for  Hubert  de  Burgh  seems  sheriff 
for  Somerset  and  Dorset,  and  Ralph  Morin,  of  Devon.     Perhaps  they 
belong  to  A.R.  2  ;  in  that  year  John  was  at  Exeter  on  the  22nd,  and 
at  Tewkesbury  on  the  30th  April,  and  his  way  between  those  places 
would  lake  him  through  Wells  "  (p.  75,  note  4.)     The  King  came  to 
Exeter  from  Bridport  and  Dorchester,  and  this  fact  would  seem  to  he 
important  when  considered  with  the  very  faint  and  indistinct  writing  at 
the  foot  of  Memb.  12^,  to  the  effect  that  the  King  was  himself  in  eyre, 
in  Somerset  and  Dorset,  to  which  it  is  possible  that  Prof.  Maitland's  atten- 
tion was  not  directed.    Moreover,  the  pleas  before  the  King  relate  to  some 
matters  partly  in  the  time  of  P.  de  Scudimore,  who  was  succeeded  as 
sheriff  by  Hubert  de  Burgh,  and  partly  in  the  time  of  the  latter.     It 
appears  more  than  probable,  therefore,  that  April,  1201,  i,c.  2  John, 
would  be  the  correct  date  to  apply  to  the  pleas  before  the  King  at 
Wells,  and  that  the  whole  of  the  proceedings  recorded  in  this  roll  are 
covered  by  the  period  of  a  little  over  two  months,  between  the  28th 
April  (2  John),  and  3rd  July  (3  John),  1201.*     It  must  not  be  assumed, 
however,  that  we  have  here  the  record  of  all  the  judicial  business  done 
by  the  King  or  by  the  justices  during  their  respective  eyres.     The  roll 

*  It  mill  be  rcmcm leered  that  John's  regnal  year  beg.in  with   Ascension  Day. 
Ill  J  fohn  the  day  fell  on  3  May,  1201. 


i  ?OMER5nSHIKE   PLEASt 

£:  -zcIt  1=  use^t'^f  c£  *cicb  of  ibe  sesibnaes  of  the  complete  record 
13  -— ly  i-.f  :c=£r  oa^.-Ljfciite  izcada  hziepoaiEaai  u  cook  down  to 
OCT  iiza^  Tb:  <=rres  oo  Me=:bL  is  cr  cnq^eoaoabiT  of  xbe  3rd 
Tear  :i  J  it;:.  Tz^  is  rrcTec  :t  d»  <^«  ot  :be  nnes,  to  which 
i:ri=r.:c:  .s  iir^-zte-i  by  U:-;  :>:t=-:cig  to  Nos.  »=  »ad  36.  It  may 
p;rr.-..^£T  >;  a±k±-i.  -■;»  censes  i^  (nicrseseS  rrartg  o  the  and 
T-sr-ol  jsar  cr.  a.  =;e=rri.-.«  ocT>:tec  15  recent  cf  tie  jtd  war?  I 
it-ji^s  ''-»■  tie  i=^»£r  ^.^s  if  ±tf  iKZ  zbii  3  wm  act  zsaxxnaoa  to  malie 
=1*  It  ±*  :':<(  cf  i^  rr.::E;ii."T  I-rcj  ncE'rraae.  rc^iiectiss rrom  the  rest, 
t:  i=ic-r3e  a  rie  mzi-ih  «-:cli  z^  »  cit»  S)  corzcwa  1:  a  |r^'?»f^  «ith- 

T-e  e-— -^  ;c  Me=::j  13  i^  »?rT  cxn^iESS  aad  coifzsed,  ia  places 
caZrti;  :rc  :?;■;  sisrcii*  -rt  n:-ch  »re=oi  a»i  rral  ct  e«s^  10  esiract 
xi^  I  Ti^r=^  ic  b:fe  is  1  uir>  acc^raa  Jsn^fr:^  ot  d>e  sessc 

J.V-r.r  12. 
;.?=^->fjr  c:  pitaj  3^  assises  cf  I>?ract.  ScosbCt.  and  Corn- 
wall, tii^.  a:  Ta-.:=:c.n     .     .     .    oc  Tocsiii-  aexi  afier  the 
ccavii  ;■:'  S:.  JocTi-- 

r.  M=r"-ii  c£  Chir.i:s  pet?  is  bsr  pCaix  Kerrj-  de  Cclum- 
zs.r.-^  zr.  a  7l?i  ■::'  liri  a^rist  :he  Price  c<  GocIS-«^* 

5.  A— ■is.«-:ric-t\\T.ia=  i?  M.-<^r<n<  =1  berpLaccWTIiani. 
>r^  z:;;<ru^)i.  ■:--  a  riea  c{  as~£re  a^ns  Osbert  ^.larTc^l 


5.  .  -«  i5i£ri  c;=^  ;?  r^-— ,£«  «bttbir  W :."iirr-  iiiber  of 
'i-.-TT^'.  -s-ai  i^ei^-:  :-  his  i=— ;^e  as  «"  Ksi.  .-c  the  iay  be  died. 
f  T^ili  i  "liic  : :'  lirrd.  »-::r.  ibe  arrt:r»r^£r>c=s.  :r:  K:r^^:=sirc', etc, 

:  Vv-iz^  -in;-  ir.  the  =i;r_ih  arrer  M:'chii:r^i;-    Ani  Tb,-^,a3 
-  .t^f  tl';  K:-%:  i  =:ark  :*:;  a  ;-jr?-. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  5 


free  tenement  in  Bikehal'^  after  the  second  crowning  of  King 
Richard.  The  jury  say  that  he  was  disseised  of  the  service  of 
the  tenement  which  Gervase,  his  brother,  held  of  him.  Judg- 
ment :  let  Walter  have  his  seisin  and  Richard  is  in  mercy. 
Damages,  3  lbs.  of  Cumin. 

7.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hamo,  father  of 
William,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee,  on  the  day  he  died, 
of  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Candel',^  which 
land  William  Beinin,  the  tenant,  says  he  does  not  claim  except 
in  custody  through  Robert  de  Curtenay,  who  held  the  same  in 
custody  with  the  same  William,  and  Robert  delivered  the  custody 
to  him  and  so  he  vouches  him  [Robert]  to  warranty.  Let  him 
have  him  [Robert]  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices. 

8.  Robert  de  Lega,  Adam  son  of  Simon,  Nicholas  de  Wate- 
Icng,  William  Purchaz,  William  de  Briton*,  Mauger  de  Croft, 
Reginald  de  GrcnvilT,  Odo  de  Duniton',  Philip  le  Saracin  and 
Humphfrey  Kael  all  come  except  Humphfrey  Kael  and  confess 
that  they  swore  falsely  concerning  the  lands  which  Nicholas  de 
Holecumb*  claimed  against  Ralph  de  Winesham  by  assize  of 
novel  disseisin,  because  there  was  a  certain  plea  between  them 
in  the  court  of  Joel  del  Moiun  concerning  the  said  land  and  an 
agreement  was  made  between  them  whereby  the  land  should 
remain  to  Ralph.  And  Nicholas  defended  that  there  was  no 
plea  in  such  court  nor  agreement  made,  and  Nicholas  de  Mcrict, 
Alexander  de  Luveni,  Ralph  de  Cruket,  John  de  Gardina, 
William  de  Stanton',  William  the  falconer  {Austurcartus), 
William  Quenell',  Richard  de  Knoll*,  Solomon  de  Wikeburg, 
Ralph  de  Cimroc,  Robert  de  Durevill*,  Robert  de  Lambroc', 
Richard  de  Avaines,  jurors,  said  that  in  truth  there  was  a  plea 
between  Nicholas  and  Ralph  in  the  court  of  Joel  touching  the 
one  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  .  .  .  and  the 
suit  between  them  was  discontinued  because  it  was  agreed  that 
one-half  of  the  virgate  should  remain  to  Ralph  and  the  other 
half  to  Nicholas  to  hold  to  him  and  his  heirs  of  Ralph  and  his 
heirs,  and  this  Osbert  the  clerk  says  in  word  of  truth. 

9.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  son  of 
William  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Raymond  dc 
Lambrok'  of  his  free  tenement  in  Lambrok'  within  the  assize. 

*  Biclcenhall,  which  was  held  by  William  dc  Lcstra  at  the  time  of  the  D.jmcsday 
Sun-cy  (IiKjuis.  Gheldi).  '^  Candle,  co.  Dorset. 


SOMEKSETSHTRE  PLEAS. 


And  Robert  came  and  confessed  the  disseisin  and  restored 
the  land  to  him  [Raymond]  and  he  is  in  mercy.  Damages, 
4  shillings.  Robert's  amercement  ^  mark.  Pledge  Richard 
Marescallus. 

10.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Ralph  father  of 
Adam  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the  day  he  died  of 
half  a  virtage  of  land  with  its  appurtenances  in  Camele  which 
land  Elviva  (?)  daughter  of  Golling*  holds  and  she  says  that  she 
claims  nothing  in  the  land  except  through  the  Prior  of  the 
Hospital  of  Jerusalem  under  whom  she  holds  the  land  but  at 
the  pleasure  of  the  Prior  who  may  remove  her  when  he  wills. 
Adam  may  have  a  writ  against  the  Prior  if  he  wills. 

1 1.  Thomas  de  Briges  offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Richard  del  Esse  and  Agnes  his  wife  and  Robert  Patin 
on  an  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  of  one  virgate  of  land  with  its 
appurtenances  in  Pockemora  and  they  do  not  come,  or  essoin 
themselves  and  they  were  summoned  etc.  Judgment :  resummon 
them  against  the  next  coming  of  the  justices. 

12.  Walter  son  of  William  and  Cicely  his  wife  brought  an 
assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  against  Wandring  de  Curceir^  con- 
cerning one  acre  of  meadow  and  a  fourth  part  of  one  acre  in 
Bosmode  and  in  Frome  and  it  is  not  prosecuted,  therefore  they 
are  in  mercy  and  Henry  de  Kareville  and  James  de  Cur'  are 
his  pledges. 

13.  Thomas  son  of  William  and  Eva  his  wife*  put  in  their 
place  Roger  de  la  Bruerea  against  John  de  Gurnay  in  the  plea 
of  assize  to  gain  or  to  lose  and  if  Roger  is  not  able  to  be  there 
Eva  puts  in  her  place  Thomas  her  husband. 

14.  Ralph  de  Aure,  Richard  son  of  Robert,  William  son  of 
Adam,  Milo  de  Hundeston'  sent  to  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  to 
hear  whom  he  wished  to  put  in  his  place  against  Hugh  de 
Grenton*  and  Sabina  and  Thomas  Burd*  and  Rohesia  his  wife 
and  William  de  Walton'  and  Amabel  his  wife  on  a  plea  of 
assize,  say  that  he  puts  in  his  place  William  de  Refford'  to  gain 
or  to  lose.' 

1  Wandregesil  de  Curcelles  is  named  in  the  cartularies  of  Bniton  and  Montacute. 
There  was  a  castle  of  Courcelles  near  Gisors. 

2  Thomas,  son  of  William  de  Harptrce  and  Eva  de  Gurnay.  Her  mother  Hawise 
was  daughter  and  heiress  of  Robert  de  Gurnay.  John  de  Gurnay,  the  defendant,  may 
l\avc  been  a  descendant  of  Robert's  younger  brother  Roger  :  See  Gurnay 's  *'  Record 
uf  the  House  of  Gournay." 

^  Sec  also  No.  19  infra^  and  note  to  No.  50  j  on  a  cas2  of  **  viIl-sicknc5S." 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS 


15.  Adam  de  Lambro  puts  in  his  place  Roger  his  son 
against  Denise,  who  was  the  wife  of  Hugh,  on  a  plea  of  dower 
etc^ 

16.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  uncle  of 
John  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the  day  he  died 
of  a  fourth  part  of  one  knight's  fee  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Hacche  etc  which  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  holds,  And  William 
his  attorney  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  the  Dean  of  Wells. 
So  let  him  have  him  [the  Dean]  to  warrant  [him]  in  the  month 
after  Michaelmas  at  VVestminster.^ 

17.  Denise,  formerly  the  wife  of  Hugh  Lambroc',  [who 
claimed]  her  reasonable  dower  out  of  the  free  tenement  in 
Lambroc  of  Hugh  who  was  her  husband,  afterwards  comes  and 
abandons  the  writ.* 

18.  Agatha,  formerly  the  wife  of  Angelinus,  offers  herself 
against  Eustace  de  Stok'  and  Margaret,  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of  a 
third  part  of  the  vill  of  Agelineston',*  and  against  Adam  de 
Morton  and  Matilda,  his  wife,  concerning  a  third  part  of  the  vill 
of  Ticheham,  which  she  claimed  against  them  in  dower.  And 
the  land  was  taken*  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King  for  the 
default  of  Eustace,  Margaret,  and  Matilda,  and  the  day  of 
taking  was  declared,  and  they  were  summoned  to  be  at  Taunton 
on  the  octave  of  St.  John  there  to  reply  and  show  cause.  And 
then  they  essoined  themselves,  and  they  did  not  seek  to  replevin 
the  land  before,  nor  did  Adam,  the  husband  of  Matilda,  who 
was  then  present,  claim  it.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Agatha  should  have  her  seisin  by  default  of  the  others. 

Memb.  I2d, 

19.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard,  brother  of 
Sabina,  wife  of  Hugh  de  Greinton'  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as 
of  fee  on  the  day  he  died  of  a  fourth  part  of  one  knight's  fee 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Hache,  and  whether  Sabina  be  his 

*  See  also  No.  17  infra. 
'  See  No.  20  infra. 

*  l*he  entry  is  careless,  but  this  is  the  sense. 

*  Quare^  is  this  Easton  in  Gordano?  Ascelin  was  under-tenant  of  Wcslon  in 
Gordanoat  the  time  of  the  Domesday  Sar\'cy.  *'  Ticheham  "  is  probably  Tickenham, 
which  is  close  by. 

*  See  No.  40  infra. 


8  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


heir,  which  land  Ralph,  son  of  Bernard,*  holds  ;  and  William 
de  Rifford*,  his  attorney,  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  the 
Dean  and  Chapter  of  Wells ;  Therefore  have  them  at  West- 
minster to  warrant  in  the  month  after  Michaelmas.  And  Hugh 
and  Sabina  his  wife,  and  William  de  Walton'  and  Amabel  his 
wife,  and  Thomas  le  Border  and  Rose  his  wife,  put  in  their 
place  Thomas  and  John  de  Stole*  to  gain  or  to  lose.  And  they 
also  put  in  their  place  the  same  against  Robert  Tortemanis 
and  Henry  de  Cunteville  on  a  plea  of  land  at  Alvrinton.* 

20.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard,  brother 
of  Amabel,  wife  of  William  dc  Walton,  was  seised  in  his  demesne 
^s  of  fee  on  the  day  he  died  of  a  fourth  part  of  one  knight's  fee 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Heche,  which  land  the  same  Ralph, 
son  of  Bernard,  holds.  And  William,  his  attorney,  comes  and 
vouches  to  warranty  the  said  Dean.  So  have  him  [present]  at 
the  time  aforesaid.^ 

21.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Gilbert  de  Norf, 
uncle  of  W^illiam,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  of  three 
fcrlings  of  land  with  their  appurtenances  in  Hecche  on  the  day, 
etc.,  which  land  Ralph,  son  of  Bernard,  holds.  And  William, 
his  attorney,  vouches  to  warranty  [the  Dean]  at  the  time  aforesaid. 
Therefore  let  him  have  him  at  the  time  aforesaid. 

22.  Hugh  de  Grenton'  and  Sabina  his  wife,  and  Thomas 
le  Border  and  Rose  his  wife,  and  William  de  Vauton'  and 
Amabel*  his  wife,  seek  against  Robert  Tortemanis  one  virgate 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Alverinton  as  the  right  and 
inheritance  of  Robert,  father  of  Sabina,  Rohesia  and  Amabel. 
And  Robert  came  and  demanded  a  view.  So  let  him  have  a 
view.  A  day  is  given  him  in  the  month  after  Michaelmas  at 
Westminster.  In  the  meantime  let  the  view  be  had.  And  be 
it  known  that  the  writ  speaks  of  the  same  Robert,  and  of  Henry 
de  Cunteville,  who  essoined  himself  de  mala  veniendi  and  that 
Robert  answered  of  his  own  free  will  without  any  coercion. 

23.  Assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  between    Roger  dc    Reinies 

'  No.  21  infra.  See  No.  14  supra.  The  proceedings  at  Westminster  are 
rcrcrred  to  in  **  Plac:  Abbreviatio,"  page  33  (Michaelmas,  3  John).  The  Dean  and 
Chapter  pleaded  a  grant  by  the  Charter  of  the  King  himself,  and  alleged  that  he  ought 
to  warrant  them.  *  Chapel  Allerton. 

•^  i.e.,  in  the  month  after  Michaelmas  at  Westminster,  No.  19  supra. 

^  William  and  Amabel  are  doubt  less  the  same  people  as  **  William  de  W^alton 
and  Amabel  his  wife,"  the  plainlifls  in  No.  20.  The  three  ladies  appear  to  have  been 
the  ilauj^hters  of  Kob.rl  Tukerel ;  see  No.  60. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


and  Emma  his  wife,  demandants,  and  James  son  of  Gerard, 
who  vouches  to  warranty  Lettice,  wife,  .  .  .  who  came  and 
vouched  to  warranty  William  Revel  of  one  hide  and  one  virgate  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Hecumbe.^  No  day  is  given, 
because  William  is  in  the  service  of  our  lord  the  King  beyond 
the  seas,  [certified]  by  writ,  G.  Fitz  Peter. 

24.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hugh  Fichet 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Ingelcis,  son  of  Jordan, 
of  his  free  tenement  in  Meriet  within  the  assize.^  The  jurors  say 
that  Hugh  did  disseise  him.  So  it  is  adjudged  that  Ingcleis 
should  have  his  seisin,  and  Hugh  is  in  mercy  for  the  disseisin. 
Damages  lar.,  amercement  lOi*.  Pledges,  Adam  de  Catenore 
and  Philip  de  Bureford*. 

25.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  Gernun, 
father  of  Henr}%  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the  day 
he  died  of  one  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Roda, 
which  land  Ranulf  Gernun  holds,  who  came  and  vouched  to 
warranty  Isolde  his  wife.     They  are  agreed.' 

26.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Elyas,  uncle  of 
Henry  de  Karevill,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the 
day  he  died  of  one  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Lokinton',  and  whether  the  same  Henry  be  his  heir,  which  land 
Beatrice  de  Karevill'  holds,  who  comes  and  says  that  the  assize 
ought  not  to  proceed,  because  Philip,  brother  of  the  same  Elyas, 
and  father  of  Henry,  was  seised  of  the  land  after  the  death  of 
Elyas,*  and  she  puts  herself  on  the  jury,  and  Henry  likewise. 
The  jurors  say  that  Philip  was  so  seised  after  the  death  of  Elyas.* 
Judgment :  let  Beatrice  hold  in  peace,  and  Henry  is  in  mercy 
for  false  claim. 

27.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  Bretasche, 
father  of  John,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  of  twelve  acres 
of  wood,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Trubewel'*  on  the  day  he 

•  Hescombe. 

•  That  is,  within  the  period  of  limitation  fixed  for  such  an  assize. 

•  An  abstract  of  the  record  of  this  fine,  which  was  levied  on  Wednesday  after  the 
octave  of  St.  John  Baptist  (4  July,  1201)  at  Taunton,  is  to  Ik;  found  in  Vol.  6,  Soni. 
Kccord  See.  Tub.,  p.  18,  where,  by  a  slip,  "Laurence"  has  been  given  for  Ranulf. 
The  record  has  **  Rawn  '*  not  "  Laur."  Ralph  Morin,  Richard  Fleming  and  Stephen 
dc  Oay  sat  as  justices  with  Simon  Pateshull  and  Eustace  de  Falconherg.  See  Feet 
of  Fines,  Som.,  3  John,  No.  35.     **  Roda  "  is  the  same  place  as  Road. 

•  In  the  roll  **  Philip  "  is  written  here  ;  obviously  by  mistake.  Henr}*  was  suing 
£S  his  uDcle*s  heir.     He  should  have  claimed  under  his  father. 

•  Nempnet. 

C 


lO  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


died,  etc.,  and  whether  the  same  John  be  his  heir,  which  land 
Elyas  son  of  William  holds.  The  jury  say  that  Richard  died 
so  seised.  Judgment :  let  John  have  his  seisin,  and  Elyas  is  in 
mercy  for  unjust  detention.  And  be  it  known  that  this  assize 
was  taken  in  the  absence  of  Elyas  through  his  default. 

28.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry,  father  of 
Eva,  wife  of  Thomas  de  Beroches,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as 
of  fee  of  two  virgates  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Sist- 
hamton'  on  the  day  when  he  received  the  religious  habit.  And 
whether  Eva  be  his  heir,  which  land  Walter  de  Sullia  holds. 
The  jurors  say  that  Henry  was  so  seised  when  he  received  the 
religious  habit.  Judgment :  let  Eva  have  her  seisin,  and  Walter 
is  in  mercy  for  unjust  detention.  And  be  it  known  that  this 
assize  was  taken  in  the  absence  of  Walter  through  his  default. 

29.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hugh,  father  of 
Robert  de  Osberviir,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the 
clay  he  died  of  half  a  hide  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Hethevenbigg',  which  land  Ralph  son  of  Bernard,  and  Richard, 
his  son,  hold.  And  Richard  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty 
Richard  de  Cumbe,  who  is  in  the  King's  service  beyond  the 
sea,  and  therefore  the  assize  remains  without  a  day.  And  it  is 
testified  by  the  county  that  Ralph  son  of  Bernard,  who  does 
not  come  or  essoin  himself,  holds  nothing  in  the  land. 

30.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hugh,  father  of 
Robert  de  Osberviir,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the 
day  he  died  of  half  a  hide  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Murelente,^  which  land  Robert  de  Cherleton'  and  Amabel,  his 
wife,  hold,  who  come  and  vouch  to  warranty  Richard  de  Cumbe, 
who  is  in  the  service  of  our  lord  the  King.  Therefore  the  assize 
remains  without  a  day. 

31.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hugh,  father  of 
Robert  de  Osberviir,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the 
day  he  died  of  one  hide  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Murilent,^  which  land  Albrea,  who  was  the  wife  of  Reginald 
de  Grenton',  holds,  who  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  Richard 
de  Cumbe,  who  is  in  the  service  of  our  lord  the  King.  There- 
fore the  assize  remains  without  a  day. 

32.  The  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  between  Gilbert  son  of 
Baldwin,  demandant,  and  John  de  Monte  Acuto  and  Isabella, 

'  Moorlinch. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  II 


his  mother,  touching  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Hele,  remains  without  a  day,  because  John  is  in  the  service  of 
our  lord  the  King  beyond  the  sea. 

33.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  de 
Deppeford',  uncle  of  Adam  de  Deppeford*,  was  seised  in  his 
demesne  as  of  fee  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Legh  on  the  day  he  died,  which  land  William  de 
Grindeham  holds.  The  jurors  say  that  Thomas  did  not  die 
seised  as  of  fee,  but  in  pledge  {de  vadio\  and  therefore  Adam 
is  in  mercy  for  false  claim  and  William  may  hold  in  peace. 

34.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas,  father 
of  John  de  Wlleng,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the 
day  he  died  of  three  ferlings  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Wlleng,  which  land  William  de  Sancta  Fide  holds,  who 
comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  the  Dean  and  Canons  of  Wells. 
Let  him  have  them  to  warranty  in  the  month  after  Michaelmas 
at  Westminster.  The  same  day  is  given  to  the  recognitors  in 
banco} 

35.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John,  uncle  of 
Alice,  daughter  of  Robert  Gernun,  was  seised  in  his  demesne 
as  of  fee  on  the  day  he  died  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Doniton',  which  land  Thomas  de  Turbeviir 
and  Adam  de  Ferag*  and  Alice,  his  wife,  hold,  and  because  it  is 
testified  by  the  county  that  Thomas  holds  nothing  in  that  land, 
Adam  and  Alice  come  and  vouch  to  warranty  Robert  de 
Turbeviir.  So  let  them  have  him  on  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices.  The  same  day  is  given  to  the  recognitors.  Let  the 
sheriff  have  the  writ.  And  Alice  puts  in  her  place  Adam,  her 
husband,  to  gain  or  to  lose. 

36.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Warner  son*  of 
Robert  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the  day  he  died 
of  one  virgate  of  land  and  five  acres,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Chesflod',  which  land  Ralph  de  Fontibus  and  Joan  his  wife, 
and  Angodus  de  Marisco  hold.  And  Ralph  and  Joan  say  that 
they  claim  nothing  in  that  land,  except  as  the  dower  of  Joan, 
and  only  in  the  five  acres.     And  so  they  vouch  William  Revell  to 

*  A  day  could  be  given  by  the  justices  sitting  at  Westmin.^tcr,  that  is  in  banco^  at 
the  bench  :  See  Bract.,  fos.  352  and  352b. 

'  This,  I  think,  is  a  mistake  for  father.  It  would  seem  thai  th  s  plea  and  No.  37 
are  two  ve  sions  of  one  proceeding.  I  can  only  fin-i  one  record  of  a  linr.  See 
**  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  13.  The  fine  was  levied  at  Taunton  in  the  octave  of  St. 
John  Baptist  (1  July,  i2oi).     Ralph  and  Joan  were  net  |)aities  to  it. 


T2  SOMERSETSHIRE    PLEAS. 


warranty,  who  is  in  the  service  of  our  lord  the  King  beyond  the 
sea,  and  therefore  no  day  is  given.  And  Angodus  holds  the 
one  virgate  of  land,  and  as  to  that  is  in  agreement  with  Robert 
aforesaid. 

37.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Warner,  father 
of  the  said  Robert,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the 
day  he  died  of  one  virgate  of  land  and  five  acres  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Sheslede,  which  land  Ralph  de  Fontibus 
and  Joan  his  wife,  and  Angodus  de  Marisco  hold.  And  Ralph 
and  Joan  come  and  say  that  they  claim  nothing  in  the  land 
except  as  the  dower  of  Joan,  and  do  not  hold  other  than  the  five 
acres  of  the  said  land,  and  so  they  vouch  to  warranty  William 
Revcll,  who  is  in  the  service  of  our  lord  the  King  beyond  the  sea. 
Therefore  no  day  is  given.  Ralph,  Joan,  and  Angodus,  who  holds 
the  one  virgate,  and  the  aforesaid  Robert  are  in  agreement.^ 

38.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thurstan,  father 
of  Robert,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  on  the  day  he 
died  of  one  virgate  and  a  half  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Thornton.  Gilbert  de  Port,  the  tenant,  comes  and  vouches 
to  warranty  Baldwin  son  of  Baldwin.  And  Robert  comes  and 
says  that  he  [Gilbert]  ought  not  to  have  any  warranty,  because 
he  has  no  other  right  or  entry  except  by  Thurstan,  his  [Robert's] 
father,  who  delivered  [the  land]  to  the  aforesaid  Gilbert  with  him 
Robert  to  the  intent  that  he  [Robert]  mi^ht  marry  the  daughter 
of  him  [Gilbert]^  .  .  .  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  on  the 
jury,  and  Gilbert  does  likewise.  The  jurors  say  that  Thurstan, 
father  of  Robert,  was  not  seised  [except]  of  three  ferlings  of  the 
land,  and  that  Gilbert  had  no  entry  or  other  right  in  those  three 
ferlings  except  as  aforesaid.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Robert  should  have  his  seisin  of  the  three  ferlings  of  land,  and 
Gilbert  is  in  mercy,  and  may  hold  in  peace  the  other  three 
ferlings  of  land. 

39.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Elias  de  Bechin- 
ton  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Alvred  la  War'  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Dreicot  within  the  assize.  The  jurors  say 
that  he  did  disseise  him.  Judgment :  let  Alvred  have  his 
seisin  and  [Eli]as  is  in  mercy.  Damages  14.^.,  amercement 
4  marks.' 

^  See  note  to  No.  3^. 

^  The  name  is  illegible,  but  "  Gilbert  "  would  appear  to  be  the  sense. 

^  In  the  mar|;in— "  //*  Glouc.  mamt,^' 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 3 


40.  The  sheriff*  certifies  to  the  justices  that  he  took  into  the 
hands  of  the  King  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Barnabas  the  Apostle 
.  .  .  viU  of  Egelingeston'  and  one  third  part  of  the  vill  of 
Tichesham  which  .  .  .  Agatha,  wife  of  Ang[elinus],  claimed  as 
her  dower  against  Eustace  de  Stole*  and  Margaret  his  wife,  and 
against  Adam  de  Mordon'  and  Matilda  his  wife,  for  the  default 
of  Eustace,  Margaret,  and  Matilda,  and  it  was  not  claimed 
within  the  time,  nor  did  any  of  them  come  except  Adam  .  .  . 
[de  Mordon*].  And  therefore  it  is  considered  that  Agatha  should 
have  her  seisin. 

41.  Hamo  de  War'  and  Christiana  his  wife,  and  Lucy,  sister 
of  Christiana,  claim  against  Ralph  de  Sparkeford'  one  acre  of 
land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Worth',  as  the  right  and  inheri- 
tance of  them,  Christiana  and  Lucy,  from  Reinfred,  their  uncle. 
And  Ralph  comes  and  demands  a  view.  A  day  is  given  them 
in  one  month  after  Michaelmas,  at  Westminster,  and  in  the 
meantime  let  the  view  be  had.  And  Ralph  puts  [in  his  place] 
Roger  de  Weston',  and  Hamo  and  Lucy  put  in  their  place  the 
said  Christiana  to  gain  or  to  lose. 

42.  A  suit  between  Guy  {Wido)  de  Hostell*  and  Philippa 
his  wife,  demandants,  and  William  de  Witefeld'  and  Matilda  his 
wife  .  .  .  [concerning]  Philippa's  dower,  goes  without  a  day 
because  Philippa  does  not  come  or  essoin  herself,  nor  does  Guy, 
as  her  attorney,  come  in  her  place  (partly  illegible). 

43.  Roger  de  Clar'  offers  himself  against  William  the 
falconer  {Austurcarius)  on  a  plea  concerning  one  virgate  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Sevenhamton'  .  .  .  [William 
does  not]  come  or  essoin  himself,  and  he  had  a  day  /*;/  batico, 
and  he  demanded  a  view  .  .  .  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  the  land  [should  he  taken  into  the  hands  of  the]  King. 
And  let  William  be  summoned  to  be  at  Westminster  in  one 
month  after  Michaelmas  .  .  .  Roger  puts  in  his  place  Milo 
de  Frankeviir. 

44.  Robert  son  of  Vivian,  and  Peter  de  Bristol,  and  Richard 
son  of  Robert,  come  before  the  justices  and  .  .  .  Yvecestr* 
and  ten  acres  of  land  outside  the  burgh  as  the  dower  of  Susanna, 
who  was  the  wife  of  Daniel     .     .     .     (partly  illegible). 

45.  Herbert  de  Heiwod'  held  a  writ  of  warranty  of  one  hide 
of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Rames     .     .     .     [It  is  not] 

*  Sec  No.  18  supra,  *  Scavington.  '  llchester. 


14  SOMERKETSHrRE  PLEAS. 

prosecuted.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy  and  likewise  [are]  his 
pledges  William  Wenbert  and  Richard  de  H  ...  (partly 
illegible). 

Remainder  of  pleas  of  the  Crown  in  the  eyre  of  our  lord  the 
King  in  the  counties  of  Somerset  and  Dorset. 

Memb.  13. 

Essoins  taken  at  Taunton  on  Tuesday  next  after  the  Feast  of 
the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul'  before  the  justices. 

46.  The  Abbot  of  Gimeges  (Jumifeges)  essoined  because  he 
was  beyond  the  sea,  against  Richard  de  Grenvill'  concerning  the 
advowson  of  the  chapel  of  Estoii',  by  Alvred  le  Har  and  W.  son 
of  Robert.  A  day  [is  given]  in  one  month  after  Michaelmas  at 
Westminster.     The  same  day  [is  given]  to  all  the  recognitors. 

47.  William  de  Novo  Mercato,  whom  Martin  de  Kaddeby 
vouched  to  warranty,  essoined  de  malo  vettiendi  against  William 
de  Eston',  by  Adam  le  Franccss  and  Walter  de  CadebL'  (The 
rest  of  the  entry  is  too  illegible  except  for  guesswork.) 

48.  Denise,  wife  of  Ranutf  de  Flury,  in  the  same  manner 
against  Reginald  de  Aubimarc  by  William  Crude.  At  the  next 
coming  of  the  justices.     He  has  pledged'  his  faith. 

49.  Emma,  wife  of  William  Avcnel,  in  the  same  manner  against 
the  same  by  Simon  de  Gingeston',  The  same  day  is  given  to 
the  recf^nitors  and  to  William  Avenel,  who  vouches  them  {eas) 
to  warranty,* 

50.  John  de  Monte  Acuto  essoined  as  beyond  the  sea, 
against  Gilbert  son  of  Baldwin,  by  German  and  Philip. 

51.  Roger  de  Parkton'  essoined  de  malo  veniendi  against 
Juliana,  daughter  of  Adam  de  Ass',  by  John  de  Hue.  In  one 
month  after   Michaelmas    at    Westminster,  and   Juliana   puts 

'  Thii  feait  fell  on  Friday,  19  June  in  iioi  {3  John). 

»  See  "  Somersfl  Hntt,    p.  9,  No.  68. 

•  "  aff"  i.e.,  affidavit.  "  AffidaHl  eueuiator  quad  kabtiil  JemimMm  tuym  ad 
aliuiH  ditm  ad  viatranlivtndum  dictum  tt  euoniiim  mum,"  Braclnn,  fa  338.  The 
Bgcnl  proflerinf;  the  excuse  musl  pledge  himself  tn  produce  his  piincipal  on  ihe  Utcr 
il>f  to  justify  his  absence.  In  the  eighteenth  ceniury,  whrn  essoin--  were  recorded  in 
English,  the  essoinei  was  termed  the  "  affirmant."  IJe  «as  commonly  a  member  <d 
(be  liclitious  family  of  I>oc. 

'  This  and  the  neti  preceding  entry  evidvnily  relate  to  one  and  ih«  tame  action, 
and  mi»t  be  rcid  logclhur. 


ji 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 5 


in  her  place  Richard  de  Grenviir.     The  same  day  is  given  to 
the  recognitors. 

52.  Richard  Cotelein  the  same  manner  against (name 

omitted)  upon  an  assize  by  Gervase  Boschet. 

53.  Richard  son  of  Ralph,  essoined  for  bed  sickness  {de  tnalo 
lecti)  against  William  de  Meulesburge  at  Pellham  in  Hereford- 
shire, by  Jordan  de  Bikewik  and  William  Freh*a.  At  the  next 
coming  of  the  justices  (struck  out).  If  not  sick  in  bed,  at 
Westminster  in  one  month  after  Michaelmas. 

54.  Walter  de  Trin  [essoined]  de  nialo  veniendi  against 
William  le  Bret  by  Edward  son  of  Peter.  At  the  next  coming 
of  the  justices.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is 
given  to  the  recognitors. 

55.  Henry  son  of  Hugh,  in  the  same  manner  for  an  assize, 
by  Robert  le  Spicer. 

56.  Henry  de  Marisco,  in  the  same  manner  for  the  same,  by 
Stephen  de  Sutton. 

Richard  de  Cumba,  whom  William  de  Waleton*and  Amabel 
his  wife,  have  vouched  to  warranty  against  Robert  son  of  Hugh, 
essoined  as  beyond  the  sea,  by  Adam  Ruffum.  Without  a  day 
because  he  was  in  the  service  of  our  lord  the  King  beyond  the 
sea. 

57.  Juliana,  wife  of  William  de  Eston',  essoined  de  malo 
veniendi  against  John  de  Reini,  on  a  plea  of  land  by  Stephen. 
In  one  month  after  Michaelmas  at  Westminster.  He  has 
pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to  William  her 
husband  in  banco, 

58.  The  same  Juliana  essoined  in  the  same  manner  against 
Nicholas  de  Peres  and  Beatrix  his  wife,  by  William  Best. 

59.  Isabella  Bonet,  in  the  same  manner  against  Robert 
Bonet,  on  a  plea  of  dower  and  of  chattels,  by  William  Galopin. 

60.  Henry  de  Cunteville.  in  the  same  manner  against  the 
three  daughters  of  Robert  Pakerel  and  John  de  Lastoke,  by 
Daniel.^ 

61.  Roger  de  Pume,  in  the  same  manner  against  Wimare 
for  an  assize,  by  William  Bugge.  At  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to 
the  recc^nitors. 

62.  Ilbcrt  de  Hawde,  in  the  same  manner  against  Helias 

Sec  No.  22. 


l6  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


de  Auno  by  Richard  son  of  William.  In  one  month  after 
Michaelmas  at  Westminster.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The 
same  day  is  given  to  the  recognitors  in  banco.  And  Elias  puts 
in  his  place  Alexander  de  Alno.  (The  rest  of  the  entry  is 
doubtful.) 

63.  Letticc,  wife  of  James  son  of  Gerard,  in  the  same 
manner  against  Roger  de  Kennes  and  Emma  his  wife,  on  a  plea 
of  warranty  by  John  de  Rumesia.  Without  a  day.  Lettice 
vouches  to  warranty  William  Kenes,  who  is  in  the  service  of  our 
lord  the  King. 

64.  Simon  de  Berges,  essoined  de  mala  veniendi  against 
Robert  de  Penard,  by  Simon  de  Brente.  At  the  next  coming 
of  the  justices.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is 
given  to  the  recognitors  and  to  Ailward,  one  of  the  tenants,  in 
banco. 

65.  Alward  de  Breges,  in  the  same  manner  against  the  same, 
by  William  son  of  Wulward'.     Alward'  comes.* 

66.  Peter  de  Bristoll,  in  the  same  manner  against  Susanna, 
by  Fabien. 

67.  Roger  de  Bavet,  in  the  same  manner  for  an  assize,  by 
Ivo  de  Fembrige. 

68.  Aubrey  P'ichet,  in  the  same  manner  against  Helias 
Pincema,  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  Jordan  de  Meirige.  In  one  month 
after  Michaelmas.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is 
given  to  Hugh  her  husband  in  banco.  And  be  it  known  that 
Ellias  claimed  the  land  from  the  aforesaid  Hugh  and  he  vouched 
to  warranty  his  wife. 

69.  The  Prior  of  Golclivc  [essoined]  for  bed  sickness  against 
Matilda  de  Chandos,  by  Richard  de  Membri  and  William  son  of 
Sjgar.  If  he  be  not  in  sickness  at  (the  next  coming  of  the 
justices — struck  out)  in  one  month  after  the  feast  of  St.  James 
;at  Westminster — struck  out)  at  Golclive  in  Gloucester. 

70.  Richard  de  Atrio  essoined  as  beyond  the  sea  against 
Walter  de  Bikhalle,  by  Jordan  Duning  and  Simon  the  smith. 

71.  Thomas  de  Wike  [essoined]  de  malo  veniendi  (or  an  assize, 
by  Robert  Champian. 

72.  Avice  de  Blakeswurde  in  the  same  manner  against 
Richard  Penpe,  by  Martin  de  Oteri.  At  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to 
the  recognitors. 

^  This  is  no  duull  a  |x>^lscript. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1/ 

73.  Anketil  Sigge  in  the  same  manner  against  Colestan  and 
Edith  his  wife,  by  Richard  Warner. 

74.  Ralph  Tabeler,  one  of  the  knights  who  should  have 
viewed  the  land  of  Eblesburye  in  the  same  manner,  by  Alard'. 

75.  John  de  Bremeset  in  the  same  manner  for  the  same,  by 
Amald.' 

76.  Joan,  wife  of  Hamelin  Blund',  in  the  same  manner 
against  William  son  of  Herding,  and  Emma  his  wife,  by 
Reginald  de  Tokington*.  At  the  next  coming  of  the  justices. 
He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to  her  husband 
Hamelin  in  banco  and  to  the  recognitors. 

77.  John  de  Gumay  in  the  same  manner  against  Thomas 
son  of  William,  and  Eva  his  wife,  for  an  assize,  by  Helyas.  In 
one  month  after  Michaelmas.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The 
same  day  is  given  to  the  recognitors  in  banco, 

78.  Matilda  de  Mordune  in  the  same  manner  against 
Agatha,  formerly  the  wife  of  Egelin  de  Porbige,  by  William 

in  Britone.     In  one  month  after  Michaelmas  at 
Westminster.     The  same  day  is  given  to  Adam  her  husband. 

79.  Eustace  de  Stok'  and  Margaret  his  wife,  in  the  same 
manner  against  the  same,  ...  by  John  Waleys  and 
Edoneus.  In  one  month  after  Michaelmas  at  Westminster.  And 
be  it  known  that  the  land  was  taken  into  the  King's  hands  and 
the  day  of  taking,  etc.,  and  it  was  not  claimed  at  the  hour  and 
term.     Therefore  let  him  have  his  seisin. 

80.  Gur  Wasun  in  the  same  manner  against  Matilda, 
daughter  of  Roger  de  Greinton,  touching  the  taking  of  law^  {de 
lege  recepienda),  by  Ralph  Wasun.  On  the  octave  of  St.  Peter 
ad  vincula  at  Tanton.  He  has  pledged  his  faith  before  Richard 
Fleming  and  the  Sheriff  and  the  Steward. 

81.  Robert  Petitpas,  essoiner  of  William  the  scribe  {ess  Willi 
scriptoris'),  in  the  same  manner,  against  Ranulph  Petwede,  by 
Thomas  de  Welles. 

82.  Roger  de  Lega  in  the  same  manner  for  an  assize 
concerning  Candel,'  by  John  Baset. 

83.  William  son  of  Geoffry,  against  John  Medic'  on  a  plea 
of  assize,  by  Hugh  son  of  Waleman.     At  the  next  coming  of 


'  Proof,  that  is,  by  oath,  with  oath-helpers,  the  wager  of  law.     This  seems  to  have 
been  a  claim  by  Matilda  for  dower.     See  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  8,  No.  71. 
*  Candel,  co.  Dorset. 

D 


1 8  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

the  justices.     He  has  pledged  his  faith.     The  same  day  is  given 
to  William  de  Esson',  one  of  the  tenants. 

Mtmb,  14. 

Pleas  of  the  crown  taken  at  Wells  on  Thursday  next  after  the 
Feast  of  St.  George  before  our  lord  the  King. 

84.  Alice  de  Lekeworth*  and  Matilda  her  sister,  appealed 
in  the  county  [court]  William  son  of  Ceroid'  Pape,  Geoffry 
son  of  Mauger,  Sybil  Hasard',  Ralph  the  miller,  and  Stephen 
the  hundredman,  of  burglary  and  breaking  into  their  house 
and  of  robbery  of  their  cloth  and  yarn  and  other  chattels  to 
the  value  of  205,  and  upwards.  Alice  and  Matilda  did  not 
prosecute,  and  William,  Geoflfry,  and  Sybil  came  before  the 
justices  and  defended  the  whole.  Ralph  the  miller  and  Stephen 
did  not  come  or  essoin  themselves,  nor  were  they  under  pledges. 
Therefore  to  judgment  on  Peter  de  Scudimore,  then  sheriff, 
when  they  were  dismissed  without  pledges,  and  likewise  on 
Therric  de  Mudiford,  Geoffry  de  Meisi,  and  Robert  Fitzurse, 
keepers  of  the  pleas  of  the  crown  (custodes  placitorum  corone)} 
Let  Sybil  be  under  pledges  against  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices,  and  William  son  of  Gerold,  and  the  others,  against  the 
next  coming  of  the  justices.  And  let  Geoffry  son  of  Mauger, 
an  ordained  clerk,  be  committed  to  Master  Alan  the  official,' 
against  the  next  coming  of  the  justices. 

85.  Edith  de  Molton',  who  appealed  in  the  county  [court] 
Randal  de  Chiw*  and  William  the  Irishman,  who  died  in  gaol, 
of  the  death  of  Matilda,  wife  of  Osbert  de  Depeford',  came 
before  the  justices  and  said  that  malefactors  came  by  night  to 
the  house  of  Osbert,  whom  she  served,  and  took  him  and  beat 

'  These  custodes  were  the  county  coroners.  The  origin  of  their  office  is  usually 
ascribed  to  the  articles  of  the  eyre  of  1194,  but  it  is  questionable  whether  this  was 
not  merely  a  declaratory  measure  and  whether  coroners  of  boroughs  and  counties  did 
not  exist  before  that  date.  See  introduction  to  "Select  Coroners  Rolls  "  (Selden 
Soc.),  by  Dr.  Gross.  They  were  elected  by  the  county.  By  the  articles  of  1 194  three 
knights  and  one  clerk  were  to  be  elected  as  custodes.  The  clericus  was  probably  an 
ecclesastic  who  acted  as  scribe.  Later  the  custodes  are  referred  to  as  coronatores. 
The  coroners  tried  criminal  pleas  and  judged  felons  taken  in  the  act.  They  appear  also 
to  have  heard  civil  pleas  in  the  county  court.  Here  they  sat  with  the  sheriff,  and  some- 
times without  nim.  Peter  de  Scudimore  and  the  coroners  were  fined  (see  Amercements 
post)^  but  whether  for  this  matter  or  not  is  not  quite  clear.  Peter  de  Scudimore  was 
sheriff  of  Somerset  and  Dorset  from  9  Ric.  I.  to  i  John. 

^  i.e.y  of  the  Bishop. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


19 


him  and  killed  his  wife,  but  she  does  not  know  whether  the 
aforesaid  [Randal  and  William]  did  this  or  not.  And  twelve 
knights  of  the  same  hundred  being  sworn,  do  not  suspect  him 
[Randal]  of  this  or  of  other  wrongdoing.  Therefore  let  him  be 
under  pledges. 

86,  William  de  Caune  appeals  William  Tropinel,  Robert  the 
miller,  and  Geoffry  and  Hugh  and  Walter  and  Jordan  and 
Henry,  sons  of  Robert,  Roger  de  Ponte,  William  son  of  the 
Prior,  Roger  son  of  Cho'ut,  Richard  Cophin',  Richard  son  of 
Batild'.  who  were  of  the  mainpast  of  the  Prior  of  Tanton',  for 
that  they,  against  the  peace  which  they  had  sworn  and  gaged 
to  him  in  the  county  [court],  came  out  of  a  mill  wherein  they 
were  hid  and  came  in  premeditated  assault  against  Walter  de 
Wik',  whom  he  [William]  had  sent  on  a  message,  and  wounded 
him  thus:  one  of  them  wounded  him  in  the  head  with  a  hatchet 
(Aasa'a),  and  another  also  wounded  him  in  the  head,  and  so  they 
ill-treated  him  that  he  died  of  his  wounds  so  given  him.  And 
then  they  wounded  Serlo,  one  of  William's  men,  so  that  he  is 
mayhemed.  Who  [Serlo]  appeals  William  son  of  Prior  for  that 
he  in  the  King's  peace  and  wickedly  assaulted  him  and 
wounded  hini  in  the  left  shoulder  so  that  he  is  mayhemed  :  And 
he  appeals  the  said  Hugh  for  that  he  wounded  him  in  the  head 
and  pierced  him  with  a  certain  knife  in  the  arms  and  legs  so 
that  he  had  fourteen  wounds  :  And  all  the  before  named  were  in 
that  force  and  likewise  in  the  death  of  the  said  Walter  Wik", 
and  this  he  saw  and  heard  and  offers  to  prove  against  the  said 
William  and  Hugh  as  to  his  mayhem  as  the  court  shall 
consider,  and  that  the  before  named  were  in  that  force.  And 
all  the  before  named,  except  Richard  Cophin'  and  Richard  son 
of  Batild'  who  are  outlawed,  come  and  defend  everything  word 
for  word.'  And  the  appellees  say  that  the  before  named 
Walter  before  he  died  came  before  the  serjeant  of  the  hundred 
and  others  and  admitted  that  no  one  had  killed  him.  nor  did 
he  accuse  any  one  save  Richard  Cophin'  and  Richard  son 
Batild',  and  they  ask  that  this  be  allowed  them.  They  also  ask 
that  it  should  be  allowed  them  that  Serlo  never  appealed  them 
in  the  county  [court]  nor  elsewhere,  nor  showed  any  wounds, 


'  Hera  ihete  ii  a  note  in  the  maiEin  ol  il 
CoHiM  ^1  ■VKOS'il  CemifatHm  qui  ei  litfiiit "  a 
IIk  Crown,"  p.  78. 


20  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

nor  mayhem,  except  after  the  outlawry,  namely  after  the  fifth* 
county  [court]  and  they  vouch  the  county  which  warrants  them 
in  this.  And  the  Miller  and  his  sons  say  that  before  this  appeal 
was  made  they  themselves  had  appealed  certain  nephews  of 
William  de  Caune,  and  to  extinguish  that  appeal  this  appeal  is 
made.  And  the  county  being  asked  which  appeal  was  first  made, 
says  the  appeal  of  the  Miller  and  his  sons  Judgment ;  the  appeal 
is  null  for  the  cause  aforesaid,  and  therefore  Serlo  is  in  mercy  ; 
And  let  the  others  be  quit  And  William  de  Caune,  who  com- 
plained that  the  sheri^  would  not  attach  the  before  named 
appellees  upon  the  appeal  of  Serlo,  is  in  mercy  for  his  false 
complaint,  because  the  whole  county  testifies  that  he  did  attach 
them.  And  let  the  previous  appeal  proceed  on  the  next  coming 
of  the  justices.  Richard  Cophin,'  outlaw,  and  Richard  son  of 
Botild',  was  (stc)  in  the  tithing  of  Esse  of  the  Prior  of  Taunton, 
and  is  in  mercy.  Richard  Cophin's  chattels  were  [worth]  los., 
for  which  Hubert  de  Burgh'  will  answer.  Richard  son  of 
Botild'  had  no  chattels,  and  was  of  the  same  tithing. 

Memb,  14//. 

87.  Goscelin  son  of  Walter  appeals  Adam  de  Rupe  for  the 
death  of  Ailneth  his  brother,  and  Adam  comes  and  says  that 
he  was  appealed  on  another  occasion  by  the  widow  and  that 
before  the  justices  he  went  quit,*  and  that  Goscelin  then  said 
nothing  against  him,  and  the  whole  county  testifies  to  this. 
Judgment  ;  the  appeal  is  annulled  because  he  appealed 
him  [Adam]  according  to  what  he  saw  and  heard,  and  he 
confesses  that  he  was  in  Ireland  when  the  murder  took  place. 
And  moreover  the  appellee  has  gone  quit.  Therefore  Goscelin* 
is  in  mercy,  and  Adam  goes  quit. 

88.  Gervase  de  Pedewell'  appeals  Stephen  the  forester  that 
he,  with  others  unknown  to  Gervase,  came  by  night  to  his  house 
in  the  King's  peace  and  wickedly  and  burglariously  broke  into 
his  house  to  rob  him  of  his  chattels  and  sought  to  kill  him 
with  a  certain  sword  which  he  snatched  from  them  and  retained, 

*  Possibly  this  was  the  court  at  which  the  two  Richards  were  outlawed.  If  an 
appellee  did  not  appear  on  the  appeal  in  the  county  court  he  was  exacted  or  pro- 
claimed, and  so  on  to  the  number  ot  tour  successive  courts.  If  he  still  failed  to  appear 
he  was  then  outlawed. 

«  The  sheriff. 

'  There  is  here  a  nuurginal  note :  **  ad /uaficium." 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


together  with  a  certain  scapulary  ;  And  this  he  offers  [to  prove] 
And  the  daughter  of  Gervase  likewise  who  saw  this.  And 
Stephen  defends  tliis.  Moreover  it  is  testified  by  the  whole 
county  that  he  and  his  friends  brought  a  writ  from  the 
justiciar  into  the  county  [court]  ordering  an  inquest  whether 
the  facts  were  as  alleged  or  no,  and  when  he  heard  that  the 
county  testified  against  him  that  he  was  of  ill-fame  and 
suspected  him,  as  it  still  testifies.*  judgment;  let  him  purge 
himself  by  water.     He  has  waged  [his  law]. 

89.  Swanilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Hugh,  appeals  Robert  the 
clerk  of  the  death  of  her  husband,  who  [Robert]  comes  and 
says  that  he  is  a  sub-deacon  and  fully  defends  the  death  and 
will  defend  where  he  ought  to  defend.  And  Master  Alan, official 
of  the  Bishop  of  Bath,  says  that  he  [Robert]  is  sub-deacon 
ordained  by  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  who  toid  him  this  as 
he  says,  and  demands  him  [Robert]  for  his  lord's  court.  And 
because  he  h.id  no  sufficient  testimony  of  the  Archbishop  he 
[Robert]  is  not  handed  over  to  him  quit,  but  is  committed  to 
him  so  that  he  should  have  him  on  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices  And  then  let  him  produce  the  Archbi-shop's  letters  in 
testimony  of  his  ordination. 

90.  Rt^er  Corbin  questioned  how  he  came  by  a  certain 
cloak  and  a  napkin  which  William  de  Burguniun  says  were 
stolen  from  him  with  other  things,  when  his  house  was  broken 
into  and  robbed,  comes  and  says  that  he  bought  the  cloak  and 
napkin  from  Robert  Tirz,  who  sent  for  him  by  Robert  Hrun 
And  he  vouched  him  to  warranty ;  And  if  he  will  not  warrant 
him  then  he  offers  to  prove  against  him  [Robert]  as  the  Court 
shall  consider.  And  Robert  comes  and  defends  the  whole;  that 
he  never  sold  the  cloak  to  him  or  the  napkin,  and  says  that  on 
another  occasion  he  [Roger]  had  appealed  him  of  this  in  full 
county  [court]  and  had  afterwards  discharged  him  and  had 
vouched  another  to  warranty  William  son  of  Richard  And 
this  the  whole  county  testifies  And  whereas  Roger  is  found 
seised  of  the  robbery  and  varies  in  his  statements  and  in  his 
voucher  of  warrantors,  it  is  considered  that  he  should  be  hanged 
and  Robert  Tirz  should  be  quit.     And  William  son  of  Richard 


'  t^of.  Ntaillani),  poinling  ou 
Stephen  Sa\  »hen  he  heard  I  he 
Down,"  [1.  79,  bu(  </Hati  wlieihe 
ill  beliet. 


1  appareni  Dmissicm,  suggests  ihat  perhaps 
mony  of  ihe  emint)' ;  "  Scltcl  Pleas  of  the 
writ  did  noi  come  after  ihc  county  had  shown 


( 


3 


22  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

was  outlawed  for  this  in  the  tithing  of  Acford*  of  John 
Eskelling'  and  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels  were  4s.,  for  which 
H.  de  Burg  must  account. 

91.  Eva  de  Babington'  appeals  Richard  Frend  of  the  death 
of  Ralph  her  son,  and  that  he  wounded  her  in  the  hand,  and 
this  she  offers  to  prove,  etc.  And  the  knights  of  the  county 
being  questioned  concerning  his  repute  say  that  he  was  accused 
before  this  thing  of  theft  of  sheep  and  oUier  misdeeds.  So  that 
for  ill-fame  he  fled  to  the  church  and  there  kept  himself 
and  then  secretly  fled  thence  And  they  say  that  because  of 
the  aforesaid  death  he  fled,  and  therefore  they  suspect  him. 
And  Richard  came  and  defended  the  whole.  Judgment ;  let 
him  purge  himself  by  water.     He  has  waged  [his  law]. 

92.  Odiema,  formerly  the  wife  of  Adam,  who  appealed 
Adam  the  miller  and  Walter  Pirun  and  Richard  de  Kandel  of 
the  death  of  Adam  her  husband,  came  and  discharged  them 
And  Adam  the  miller  died,  and  Walter  who  comes  is  not 
suspected.  Let  him  be  under  pledges.  And  Richard  de  Kandel 
did  not  come  or  essoin  himself  and  his  pledges  were  Richard 
de  Brimeshull  and  the  tithing  of  Brimeshull*  and  is  (sic)  in  mercy 
(and  the  keepers  of  the  pleas  of  the  crown  Robert  son  of  Hugh 
John  de  Maneston  and  Ralph  Huse  who  confessed  that  Adam 
the  Miller  was  not  attached  and  this  was  in  the  time  of 
P.  de  Scudimore — struck  out), 

93.  Ermald'  de  Ber'  appealed  Guy  Wasun  and  John  his  son 
and  John  Bulepaun'  of  the  death  of  a  certain  woman  and  does 
not  come  to  prosecute,  and  therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Ralph 
the  reeve  (prepositus)  of  Bere  was  his  pledge  and  is  in  mercy. 
Let  them  be  appealed  before  the  justices  in  eyre  to  stand 
to  right,  but  the  fourth  day  cannot  be  waited  for.  And  let 
the  sheriff  take  pledges  for  John  Bulepaun*  And  John  son  of 
Guy  is  committed  to  Master  Alan  the  official  of  the  Bishop 
because  he  is  a  clerk. 

94.  Osanna  de  Hunteworth',  who  appealed  Ralph  the  tailor 
and  Robert  le  Fader^  of  the  death  of  Herbert  her  husband 
and  of  the  robbery  and  carrying  off  of  his  chattels,  does  not  come 

^  **  As  to  *  Shillington,*  vulgarly  Ockford  Shilling,  more  truly  Ockford  Eskelling 
or  Acford  Skyllings,  see  Hutchins'  *  Hist,  of  Dorset,' vol.  iii,  p.  93."  Prof.  Mailland's 
note  **  Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown." 

'■^  **  Kandel"  is  interlineated  and  written  above  "Brimeshull." 

^  Quare  slip  for  Fabet ,  the  smith. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  23 

or  essoin  herself,  and  therefore  they  are  under  pledges  until  the 
next  coming  of  the  justices,  so  that  it  may  then  be  enquired  of 
what  credit  they  are  and  whether  they  be  suspected. 

95.  Robert  the  smith  of  Pukinton'  was  killed  at  Barinton*, 
and  David  and  Martin  of  Stokelinz  were  suspected,  so  that  the 
vicinage  followed  them  with  hue  and  cry  and  took  them  in 
flight,  and  this  the  county  testifies.  And  they  defend  the  whole 
word  for  word.  Judgment ;  let  them  purge  themselves  by 
water.  And  let  Geoffry  Sigrin,  who  fled  for  that  death,  be 
exacted  in  .  .  .  and  outlawed  pursuant  to  the  assize  of  the 
realm. 

96. 

An  entiy  of  an  appeal  by  the  wife  of  Eustace  de    .     .    .    against  Alwin,  which 
is  too  illegible  to  be  reproduced. 

97. 

An  entry  in  which  the  name  of  Geoffry  de  Seles  alone  is  legible. 


Memb.  15. 

98.  Edith,  mother  of  William  the  smith,  appealed  William 
Fareman  of  the  death  of  William  her  son,  and  it  is  not  followed 
up.  Therefore  let  William  Fareman  be  under  pledge  until  the 
next  coming  of  the  justices. 

99.  Avice  Fairchidd'  appeals  Ralph  Gowd'  of  the  death  of 
her  son,  and  she  died.  Therefore,  upon  consideration  of  the 
justices,  Ralph  should  be  under  his  pledges. 

loa  Geoffry  de  Malecumb*  was  killed  as  he  was  returning 
from  the  tavern  in  the  fields  of  Aile,  and  William  the  cobbler 
was  taken  for  the  death  and  was  found  seised  of  the  dead 
man's  cap  and  the  knife  wherewith  he  was  killed.  And  the 
whole  county  testifies  to  this.  And  William  defends  the  whole. 
Judgment;  let  him  purge  himself  by  water.  He  has  waged  [his 
law]. 

Amercevtents, 

10 1.  William  de  Kaun\  5  marks  for  false  complaint. 
Serlo,  the   same   William's   man,   J    mark   for   false  com- 
plaint. 
The  tithing  of  Esse  of  the  Prior  of  Tanton',  i  mark  for  the 
flight  of  Richard  Cofin  and  Richard  son  of  Botild'. 


Chattels.     Hubert  de  Burg',  sheriH;   lo  sfaOIii^  for  the 

chattels  of  Richard  Cofin. 
The  tithing  of  Acford  of  John  Esfcrlling.  \  mark  for  the 

Sight  of  William  son  of  RichardL 
Hubert  de   Burg*,  sheriff,  4  shillings  for  the  rtoftris  of 

William  son  of  Richard. 
Ennaldo  de  Ber\  i  marie,  bccanse  he  did  not  prosccnte  his 

appeal  against  Gii>-  Wasmi,  and  half  thereof  to  the 

chirographer. 
Ralph,  reeve  of  Ber\  \  mark,  because  he  had  not  Ennaldo 

by  his  pledge. 
Geofir^'  de  Meisi,  i  mark  for  his  transgicssaoa. 
Robert  Fitzurse,  I  mark  for  the  like. 
Therric  de  Midiford',  100  marks  for  the  like. 
Peter  de  Scudimore  blamk)         for  the  likcL 

From  the  same  50  marks  and  i  palfinej'  for  forfeitiire  of  the 


ROLL  Xo.  2.    (Bedford.) 


An  endorsement  on  Memb.  S  gives  the  date  of  this  roQ  as  3  Hen.  III., 
that  is  12:9.  It  has  no  title  beyond  this  endorsement,  vhich  states 
the  regnal  year.     It  contains  civi!  pleas  and  pleas  of  the  down. 

ilemb,  4. 
Pleas  of  assize  on  St.  Clement  s  day  at  Bedford. 

Memb.  izd, 

lOitf.  Hugh  de  Perers  offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  the  Abbot  of  Ke\'nesham  on  a  plea  to  hear  inquest 
d€  pT  aiuf  tnquts\  teaching  one  \-irgate  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Pubelanre,  which  the  same  Hugh  claimed  as 
his  right,  etc  in  the  Court,  eta,  at  Northampton,  against  the 
Abbot.  The  Abbot  does  not  come,  etc,  and  he  was  seen  in 
CoLirt.   and   he   withdrew   without    leave.       Afterwards    Hugh 


I: :« aa  I'jtu  wbs'acT  -.hi?  cstir  appHes  :o  Miiiferd  or  Scaixaorc     Ii  b  pvefaoed 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  25 


claimed  the  default  which  the  Abbot  had  made  in  the  same 
court,  and  therefore  it  is  considered  by  the  court  that  the  land 
should  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  that  he 
[the  Abbot]  should  be  summoned  to  be  [present]  on  the  morrow 
of  St.  Hilary  to  hear  his  judgment,  etc. 


ROLL  No.  481.    (Lincolnshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  appears,  from  the  title  on  Memb.  3,  to  be 
3  Hen.  III.,  November,  12 19.  On  Memb.  8^.  we  have  the  morrow  of 
the  Epiphany  as  a  date,  and  on  Memb.  23  the  tjuindcne  of  St. 
Katharine,  that  is  the  9th  December.  Presumably  all  these  dates  are 
in  1 2 19. 

Memb,  3. 

Roll  of  pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Lincoln  on  the  quindene 
of  SL  Martin  in  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry, 
before  the  lord  of  Lincoln  and  his  companions,  justices  itine- 
rant 

Mevib,  Sa. 
Assizes  taken  at  Lincoln  on  the  morrow  of  the  Epiphany. 

Memb.  9. 

lOi^.  The  lady,  Nichola  de  Haia,  puts  in  her  place  Robert 
Griffin'  or  Alan  dc  Bifeld  against  Walter  son  of  Richard  the 
reeve  on  a  plea  of  assize  of  mort  d'ance.^tor  in  the  county  of 
Someiset 

Memb,  23. 

Pleas  taken  before  the  justices  at  Lincoln  on  the  quindene 
of  St  Katharine,  in  the  third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry, 
before  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  and  his  companions,  etc. 


26  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


ROLL  No.  755.    (Somerset.) 

This  roll  seems  to  be  complete,  and  upon  the  whole  it  is  in 
excellent  condition.  It  records  the  proceedings  at  the  close  of  the  9th 
and  beginning  of  the  loth  years  of  Henry  IIL  (a.d.  1225),  before 
Martin  Pateshull,  John  de  Reyny,  Jordan  Oliver,  and  Ralph  de 
Lydiard,  the  justices  assigned  to  deliver  the  gaol,  and  to  hold  pleas  of 
novel  disseisin  in  the  county  of  Somerset.  The  writ,  or  commission,  is 
printed  in  Rot.  Claus.,  vol.  2,  p.  76,  in  "common  form,"  with  a  note  to 
the  ctTcct  that  ever}'  justice  was  similarly  addressed  according  to  the 
lime  and  p'ace  appointed.  Translated  it  reads  as  follows: — "The 
King  to  such  an  one  greeting.  Know  that  we  have  constituted  you  our 
justice,  together  with  our  well-beloved  and  faithful  So  and  so,  to  take 
assizes  of  n<n'el  disseisin,  and  to  deliver  the  gaol  in  the  county  of  So 
and  so.  And  we  have  commanded  our  sheriff  that  on  such  a  day 
and  at  such  a  ])lace  he  should  cause  to  come  before  you  all  assizes 
of  novel  disseisin  which  are  summoned  before  the  justices  at  the 
first  assize  when  they  shall  come  into  those  parts,  and  all  attach- 
ments and  suits  which  appertain  to  the  gaol  delivery.  And  that  from 
ever}'  vill  in  the  county  he  shall  cause  to  come  four  lawful  men  and  the 
reeve,  and  from  every  borough  or  market  town  twelve  lawful  men,  and 
all  the  knights  an.d  free  tenants,  to  do  what  you  and  the  aforesaid 
justices  shall  tell  them  on  our  behalf  to  the  obser\*ance  of  our  peace 
concerning  those  who  are  suspected  or  indicted  of  thefts,  robberies,  or 
homicides.  And  therefore  we  command  you  that  putting  aside  all 
delay  and  hindrance,  you  shall,  at  the  day  and  place  aforesaid,  meet 
your  associates,  and  together  with  them  apply  yourself  diligently  and 
faithfully  to  this  business."  The  date  of  this  writ  is  the  14th  June, 
9  Henry  III.  Then  follow  the  names  of  the  justices  assigned  for 
various  counties,  Martin  Pateshull  being  named  in  the  commissions  for 
Surrey,  Berkshire,  Oxfordshire,  Gloucestershire,  Wiltshire,  Somerset, 
Dorset,  and  Hampshire.  For  Somerset  we  have  Martin  Pateshull,  with 
John  de  Reyny,  Jordan  Oliver,  and  Matthew  de  Clevedon,  knights  of 
that  shire.  Matthew's  name  was  struck  out  later,  and  a  note  added  that 
Ralph  de  Lydiard  had  been  appointed  in  his  place  by  letters  directed 
to  ^lartin  Pateshull  and  his  associates,  and  also  to  Ralph  himself. 
This  note  is  tested  at  Westminster  the  20th  August  in  the  same  year. 
The  feast  of  St.  Margaret  the  Virgin,  the  20th  July,  and  Ilchester  were 
originally  fixed  by  the  King's  writ  as  the  time  and  place  for  holding  the 
assize ;  but  the  date  was  subsequently  altered  by  Martin  Pateshull 
himself,   and  it  must  have  been  to  a  day  after,  and  probably  some 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  2J 


considerable  time  after,  the  20th  August,  when  Ralph  de  Lydiard  was 
substituted  for  Matthew  de  Clevedon.  It  was  probably  as  late  as 
October,  for  we  have  the  date  10  Henry  III.  on  memb.  10  of  the  roll, 
and  Henry's  regnal  year  began  on  28th  October.  Martin  Pateshull 
was  due  at  Sherborne  after  completing  the  Somerset  business,  and  as 
originally  fixed  he  was  to  be  there  on  the  Saturday  after  St.  Margaret's 
day,  so  that  it  was  not  expected  that  the  business  in  Somerset  would 
detain  the  justices  many  days.  The  gaol  delivery,  of  which  this  roll  is 
a  record,  was  of  an  unusual  character.  It  will  be  observed  that  all  the 
townships  had  to  send  representatives,  as  on  an  eyre. 

In  this  roll  we  have  evidence  of  the  great  change  which  had  taken 
place  in  procedure  since  the  date  of  the  Roll  No.  1171.  The  ordeal 
had  been  condemned  by  the  Lateran  Council  in  12 15.  In  12 18  Henry 
had  ordered  his  justices  to  respect  the  decree  of  the  Church,  and  in 
this  roll  there  is  not  a  single  instance  of  the  practice.  The  duel,  too,  is 
only  waged  in  the  cases  of  the  approver  Walter  de  Haverburg  (see  Nos. 
105  to  108  and  1 11).  We  find  criminals  tried  in  various  ways — that  is, 
not  always  by  the  sworn  accusation  of  the  twelve  jurors  and  the  four 
townships.  Sometimes  the  conviction  is  by  a  jury  of  twelve  and  the 
"whole  of  the  hundred"  (Nos.  140,  142)  ;  by  three  juries  of  twelve 
and  fivt,  townships  (No.  152);  by  two  juries  of  twelve  (No.  109)  ;  by 
the  juries  of  three  hundreds  (No.  206) ;  or  by  an  inquest  of  persons  sent 
to  ascertain  the  facts  (No.  173).  In  no  case  is  there  any  statement, 
such  as  we  find  in  the  Gloucestershire  roll  of  1221,  that  the  accused 
paid  a  fine  to  the  King  for  any  particular  mode  of  trial.  There  is  an 
order  for  the  maintenance  of  an  approver  for  seven  days  (No.  112). 

The  roll  has  an  unusually  complete  record  of  amercements  and 
chattels,  which  I  have  discussed  in  a  note  to  No.  383.  The  volume 
of  "  Somerset  Fines "  contains  only  two  abstracts  of  fines  taken  at 
Ilchester  in  9  Henry  III.,  and  they  can  both  be  traced  in  this  roll. 
The  territorial  divisions  of  the  county  are  not  now  identical  with  those 
of  the  time  of  Henry  III.,  so  that  we  cannot  check  the  rolls  by  the 
present  hundreds.  It  is  important,  however,  to  observe  that  the  list  of 
hundreds  in  this  and  the  next  following  roll  agree  almost  exactly. 
Roll  No.  756  has  the  hundreds  of  Ciieddar,  Mclls,  and  Wellington, 
which  do  not  appear  in  this  roll.  On  the  other  hand,  this  roll  includes 
Bninelond,  described  in  roll  756  as  a  **  manor,"  Lidyard,  and  Wrington, 
which  are  not  included  as  hundreds  in  the  later  roll.  It  would  seem 
probable,  therefore,  that  in  this  roll  we  have  a  record  from  which  nothing 
is  wanting,  unless  the  incidental  reference  (p.  105)  to  Ban  well  as  a 
hundred,  and  the  marginal  note  that  a  particular  matter  must  be  fully 
inquired  into  in  the  hundred  of  Brent  (No.  220)  could  lead  us  to  infer 
that  perhaps  the  record  as  to  these  two  phces  may  be  wanting. 


28  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Mentb,  i. 

Pleas  of  gaol  delivery  and  assizes  of  novel  disseisin  taken  before 
M.  de  Pateshull,  John  de  Reyn,  Jordan  Oliver,  and  Matthew 
de  Clivedone  at  Ivelcestre  in  the  county  of  Somerset  in  the 
ninth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John, 
and  also  before  Ralph  de  Lidiard'. 

1 02.  Ada  Pamel  puts  in  her  place  Robert  de  Aldeham  or 
Sweting'  de  Hunebir'  against  William  de  Mariscis  on  a  plea  of 
suit  and  against  Jordan  Ridel  on  a  plea  of  novel  disseisin. 

103.  Hugh  Peverel  of  Sanford  puts  in  his  place  Robert  de 
Luccumbe  against  Hugh  de  Sanford  on  a  plea  of  debt.  Ralph 
de  Crudelincot'  is  in  mercy  for  default.^ 

104.  Walter  de  Haverberg*,  approver,  confessing  himself  a 
thief,  appealed  Geoffry  Galle  of  Taunton  of  companionship 
[with  him]  in  larceny,  and  Geoffry  fled,  and  the  bailiff  of  Tan- 
ton  has  [his]  chattels,  and  therefore  should  answer.  Geoffry  was 
in  frank  pledge.    He  had  no  chattels.' 

105.  The  same  Walter  appeals  Ralph  Budding  of  Bath  that 
they  together  robbed  a  certain  house  at  Farenberg*  and  bound 
the  host  and  his  serving-woman  {Jiospitem  et  feminam  suafn\ 
and  the  same  Ralph  then  killed  a  certain  boy,  and  of  that 
robbery  the  same  Ralph  had  one  surcoat  {supertunica\  a  linen 
cloth,  and  many  other  things,  and  a  cloak,  and  this  he  [Walter] 
offers  to  prove  against  him  by  his  body  as  the  court  shall 
consider.  And  Ralph  comes  and  defends  the  whole  by  his 
body.  And  therefore  let  Ralph  give  gage  to  defend  and 
Walter  to  prove,  and  let  them  come  on  the  morrow  armed. 
Ralph  was  vanquished  and  hanged.^ 

106.  The  same  appeals  William  Thorp  of  Bruges*  for  that 
they  together  killed  a  certain  man  in  Brentemareis,*  to  wit 
William  Evcrard,  and  this  he  offers  to  prove  by  his  body  as  the 
court  shall  consider.  And  William  comes  and  defends ;  and 
first  he  defended  the  whole  by  his  body,  and  afterwards  he  put 

^  This  has  "  Wilts  "  in  the  margin,  but  it  has  a  Somerset  connexion. 

^  The  words  "  he  had  no  chattels  "  must,  I  think,  have  been  added  from  later 
information  ;  but,  judjjing  from  the  appearance  of  the  handwriting  and  cclour  of  the 
ink,  the  addition  must  have  been  almost  contemporaneous  with  the  original  record. 

^  There  is  a  marginal  note  here,  **  Hanged.     Inquire  as  to  chattels." 

*  Bridgwater. 

^  BrcHL  Marsh. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  29 


himself  upon  the  country  for  delay ;  therefore  it  is  considered 
that  he  should  defend  himself  by  his  body.  Let  him  0ve  gage 
to  defend,  and  Walter  to  prove,  and  let  them  come  to-morrow 
armed.  Afterwards  Walter  came  and  withdrew  [his  appeal] 
and  confessed  that  William  was  not  guilty.  Therefore  it  is 
adjudged  that  he  [William]  be  under  pledges,  and  that  Walter 
be  hanged.* 

107.  The  same  appeals  Thomas  de  Kendale  for  that  they 
together  robbed  a  certain  house  near  St.  Albans,  and  he 
(Thomas)  had  for  his  share  a  cape,  one  surcoat,  and  two  shifts 
(camisios  femine\  and  one  pair  of  breeches,  and  this  he  offers  to 
prove,  etc.  And  Thomas  comes  and  defends  the  whole  by  his 
body.  Therefore  let  Thomas  give  gage  to  defend,  and  Walter 
to  prove,  and  let  them  come  armed  on  Saturday.  Thomas  was 
vanquished. 

108.  The  same  appeals  Robin  Robe  for  that  they  together 
stole  nine  sheep  on  Menedup,  so  that  he  had  three  sheep  for  his 
share,  and  this  he  offers  to  prove  by  his  body.  And  Robin 
comes  and  defends  the  whole  by  his  body.  Therefore  let 
Thomas  give  gage  to  defend,  and  Walter  to  prove,  and  let  them 
come  armed  on  Monday. 

109.  The  same  appeals  William  Chund  as  a  receiver  of 
stolen  goods  which  he  received  knowingly,  and  of  their  robbery 
he  received  clothes,  capes,  frocks  {rochetd),  and  many  other 
things,  and  this  he  offers  to  prove,  etc.  And  William  comes  and 
puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good  or  ill.  And  the  jurors 
say  upon  their  oath,  and  likewise  twelve  jurors  of  the  burgh  of 
Tanton  say  upon  their  oath,  that  they  suspect  him  of  the 
receipt  with  knowledge  ;  therefore  let  him  be  hanged. 

1 10.  The  same  in  the  same  manner  appeals  Walter  Gyald  as 
a  receiver  of  stolen  goods,  and  this  he  offers,  etc.  And  Walter 
comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country.  And  the  jurors  say  that  they  do  not  suspect  him,  nor 
do  they  know  anything  of  him  except  what  is  good.  There- 
fore let  him  be  released. 

1 1 1.  The  same  appeals  Robin  Coc  of  the  same  companion- 
ship [with  him]  in  theft  for  that  they  together  stole  the  afore- 
said nine  sheep,  and  he  had  for  his  share  three  sheep,  and  this 

'  It  would  seem  to  have  been  not  uncommon  to  await  the  result  of  all  the  appeals 
by  an  approver  before  dealing  with  him. 


30  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


he  offers,  etc.     And  Robin  comes  and  defends  the  whole  by  his 
body. 

1 12.  Walter  de  Halton',  confessing  himself  to  be  a  thief,  has 
become  approver,  and  he  has  been  granted  his  life  and  members 
for  seven  days.  Let  him  have  every  day  three  half- pence  for 
his  sustenance,  to  wit,  from  Wednesday  next  after  the  Nativity 
of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  etc.* 

113.  Philip  de  Spaulerg,  taken  upon  suspicion  of  larceny, 
comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country  for  good  or  ill. 

The  Hundred  of  MiLVERTONf. 

114.  Richard  the  baker  {pistor)  and  Stephen  the  reeve  of 
Sanford,  and  Richard  Cape  and  John  his  son,  Roger  de  B  . 
.  .  James  of  the  end  of  the  town  of  Sanford,  and  Richard  de 
Parseie,  taken  for  the  death  of  Nicholas  de  Arundel  their  lord, 
who  was  killed  and  burned  in  his  house,  come  and  defend  that 
death  And  being  questioned  where  they  were  when  that  house 
was  set  on  fire  say  that  they  lay  in  the  town  and  not  in  the 
court,  but  in  truth  they  came  thither  before  the  said  house  was 
burned,  and  they  confessed  that  they  saw  their  lord  burned  in 
his  house  about  the  hour  of  prime,  and  they  did  not  dare 
[remove  him]  without  view  of  the  coroners.  And  it  is  testified  by 
the  knights  of  the  county  that  the  same  reeve  before  the  burning 
of  the  house  carried  off  all  the  chattels  of  his  lord  from  the  court 
of  the  lord,  and  that  the  same  Richard  the  baker  on  the  morrow 
went  into  Devon  to  the  land  of  his  lord  and  led  away  a  horse,  and 
took  and  carried  off  the  chattels  of  his  lord  which  were  there.  And 
they  all  put  themselves  upon  the  country.  And  the  knights  of 
the  hundred  and  the  knights  of  the  hundred  of  Tanton  and 
others  and  the  townships  come  and  say  upon  their  oaths  that 
they  suspect  those  men,  and  the  whole  township  [Sanford], 
except  four  men,  to  wit  Richard  de  Bosco,  William  Brekehere, 
Stephen  the  reeve  .  .  .  and  Warin  the  tailor  and  Richard 
with  one  eye,  and  say  positively  that  when  they  were  pursuing 
their  lord  to  kill  him  the  same  Nicholas  fled  to  the  church  and 
would  have  entered  it,  and  the  chaplain  .shut  the  door  and  he 
dared  not  enter,  and  they  killed  him  and  put  him  in  his  house 

^  This  entr)'  has  against  it  the  marginal  note  *'  Dorset." 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  3 1 


and  then  set  fire  to  it.  Therefore  let  them  be  drawn  and  then 
hanged.  And  let  the  other  men  of  Sanford  be  taken.  Let 
inquiry  be  made  as  to  their  chattels. 

And  Roger  Akerman  and  Hugh,  son  of  Hugh  Cape,  accused 
of  the  same  death,  have  fled  and  are  suspected.  Let  them 
be  exacted  and  outlawed,  and  let  inquiry  be  made  as  to  their 
chattels. 

Aylbriht  de  Hulecumbe,  Richard  son  of  Richard  de  Hole- 
cumbe,  Walter  de  Pashcie,  and  another  Walter  Pasheie,  and 
.  .  .  Ateloncsande  and  Ralph  his  brother,  and  Richard  de 
Holecumbe  the  elder,  and  Edith  daughter  of  John  de  Burcumbe, 
taken  for  the  said  death,  come  and  defend  that  death.  And  the 
aforesaid  jurors  and  the  townships  come  and  say  upon  their  oaths 
that  all  of  them  except  Richard  de  Holecumbe  with  one  eye, 
whom  they  have  previously  acquitted,  are  guilty  of  that  felony. 
Therefore  let  them  be  hanged. 

Jordan  de  Hall  ....  Robert  de  Diggelford,  Hugh  son 
of  Juliana,  and  Edward  de  Sanford,  are  accused  of  the  same 
felony,  and  they,  except  Edward  who  is  infirm,  have  fled  and 
are  suspected.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed, 
and  let  inquiry  be  made  as  to  their  chattels. 

115.  Richard  de  Sedlep,  William  le  Futur,  and  Matilda  his 
sister,  and  Humfrey  de  Huntere,  abiding  at  Milvertone,  were 
taken  for  the  deaths  of  four  men  found  killed  in  Essemore,  and 
they  were  put  in  the  gaol  of  Ivecestre,^  and  they  all  escaped 
from  prison  except  Humfrey,  who  was  hanged.^  And  Nicholas 
de  .  .  .  Payn  Bere  of  Glamorgan,  Ralph  Knepe,  accused 
of  the  same  deaths,  fled,  and  they  were  .  .  .  [dwellers  ?]  at 
Glamorgan  in  Wales.  And  Payn  was  attached  by  Thomas 
Fluri,  Th  .  .  .  de  Wike,  H  .  .  .  de  Ken,  Robert  de 
Trebergh,  Luke  Barri,  Thomas  de  Bonevile,  and  William 
Maureward.  And  Paine  .  .  .  [essoins  himself?]  and  he 
has  a  day  by  his  essoin  at  Wilton  in  fifteen  days  from  Tuesday* 
the  morrow  of  the  Nativity  of  the  Virgin,  and  then  if  he  do 
not  come  there  let  him  be  under  pledges.      And  as  to  those  who 

*  The  gaol  seems  to  have  been  in  a  bad  way.  On  12  March,  9  Hen.  III.,  the 
King  ordered  the  sheriff  of  Somerset  to  repair  the  *'  broken  gaol  "  without  delay  : 
2  kot.  Claus.,  p.  22 ;  see  also  2  Rot.  Claus.,  p.  ijd;  see  No.  250. 

'  **  ^m  suspensu^  est.^"     Perhaps  he  hanged  himself  in  prison. 

*  The  morrow  of  the  Nativity  ol  the  Virgin  in  9  Hen.  III.  (1224-5)  ^^  Tuesday, 
9th  Sept 


32  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

escaped  let  them  be  treated  as  outlaws.  The  chattels  of  Richard, 
William,  Matilda,  and  Humfrey  are  worth  13^.,  of  which  2s. 
are  given  to  the  widow  of  one  of  the  slain,  and  the  sheriff  will 
answer  for  the  rest  And  Nicholas  and  Ralph  are  suspected, 
therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Payn  is  not 
suspected,  therefore  .  .  .  [if]  he  return  let  him  be  under 
pledges.  Chattels  of  Humfrey  3^.,  of  Matilda  3J.,  of  William  8^1 
For  which  the  sheriff  [must  answer].^ 
116. 

The  next  entry  is  almost  illegible.  It  relates  to  the  same  murders.  "William 
.  .  .  and  John  .  .  .  are  suspected,  and  are  exacted  and  outlawed.  John 
was  taken  at  Taunton  and  there  impnsoned.     Roger  de  Ford  is  also  named. 

117.  William  .  .  .  gate  was  wounded  so  that  he  died  of 
his  wound,  and  Henry  de  Holte,  Richard  C  .  .  .,  and  Richard 
de  Chelleworth  were  attached  for  that  death.  And  Henry  does 
not  come,  and  is  attached  by  William  de  H  .  .  .,  William  de 
L  .  .  esford,  John  Bretasche,  William  de  Eston,  Richard  de 
H  .  .  .  ,  William  Caff  .  .  .  de  L  .  .  .  ,  Thomas  de 
Wike,  Geoffry  de  .  .,  Roger  de  Treberg',  Roger  de  Rad- 
,  .  .  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  Richard  de  Chelleworth 
is  not  jsuspected,  therefore  let  him  be  liberated.  Henry  de 
Holte  is  suspected  of  having  killed  him  [William].  Let  him 
be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Richard  is  dead.  Henry  de  Holte 
has  land,  which  is  taken  in  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King. 

118.  Orguillusa,  wife  of  Huward  de  Diskole,  puts  in  her  place 
.    .     .     on  a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

119.  Be  it  remembered  that  the  Prior  of  Legh  carried  off  the 
body  of  Nicholas  Arundel  and  buried  it  without  [view]  of  the 
coroners  or  bailiffs  of  our  lord  the  King.* 


Memb,  id. 

The  Hundred  of  Tintelhill 

120.  Knows  nothing. 


^  These  figures  differ  from  those  in  the  statement  of  the  case.  There  seems  to  be 
a  clerical  error.  In  the  schedule  (No.  383)  Humfrey  and  William's  chattels  arc 
given  as  worth  2s.  8^.,  which  would  agree  with  the  first  statement  in  the  record, 
alter  allowing  for  the  2J.     In  No.  383  William  ii  called  '*  Richard." 

*  See  No.  114. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  33 


The  Burgh  de  Monte  Acuto. 

121.  Knows  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Tanton'. 

122.  The  same  say  concerning  John  de  la  Leg'  and  Reginald 
dc  la  Leg  that  they  are  evildoers,  as  the  jurors  of  Milverton  testify. 
And  the  jurors  say  that  John  was  taken  by  the  bailififs  of  our 
lord  of  Winton,*  and  put  in  prison  in  his  castle  of  Tanton,  and 
that  he  [John]  broke  gaol  and  escaped.'  Therefore  to  judgment 
for  the  escape.  And  William  Bulloc,  bailiff  of  Tanton',  was 
present,  and  being  asked  why  he  did  not  deliver  the  prisoner  to 
the  sheriff  and  to  the  gaol  of  our  lord  the  King  says  that  he 
does  not  know ;  therefore  this  must  be  discussed.  John  and 
Reginald  had  land  and  chattels  which  were  worth  4s,  6t/.,  and 
three  acres  of  corn  ipladi)  [on  which]  let  a  price  be  put.  And 
they  are  suspected,  and  therefore  they  are  put  in  exigent  and 
outlawed.  The  value  of  the  crop  is  3J.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

123.  William  Wiling  and  Walter  Budde,  suspected  of 
consorting  with  the  said  John  and  Reginald,  have  fled.  William 
was  in  the  tithing  of  the  Prior  of  Tanton'  outside  the  gate  of 
Tanton',  and  Walter  Budde  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  lands  of 
Niwelond',  and  therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  And  they  are 
suspected ;  therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  William 
and  Walter  had  no  chattels  except  a  crop  of  the  value  of  \os, 
which  Walter  had.     For  this  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

124.  Gorwy  Budde,  Walter  de  la  Sterte,  Gilbert  son  of 
Jordan  de  Cumb',  Osbert  son  of  Roger  Chelemund',  Herbert 
son  of  Roger,  William  Counte,  and  Alice  Black  {nigra),  accused 
of  harbouring  the  aforesaid  evildoers  and  with  knowledge,  come 
and  defend  the  whole,  and  put  themselves  on  the  country  for 
good  and  ill.  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  townships  of  Punderford, 
Trendle,  Hulle,  Holeweie,  and  Otriford  come  and  say  upon  their 
oath  that  they  [the  accused]  at  sometime  received  them  but 
unwillingly,  except  Alice,  who  took  them  food  and  received  them 
on  occasion  in  fear  of  death.  And  it  is  testified  by  the  whole 
county  that  the  bailiffs  of  Tanton'  have   often  attached  them 

*  The  Bishop  of  Winchester.  '  Sec  Nos.  130  and  132. 

y 


34  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

and  they  often  promised  to  go  away,  so  that  the  aforesaid 
accused  did  not  know  whether  they  should  be  on  their  guard  or 
not  {eos  septus  attachiaverunt  et  promiserunt  cos  abire  septus 
ita  quod predicti  rectati  nescierunt  utrum  essent  cavendi  vel  noti). 
And  therefore  let  all  except  Alice^  be  under  pledges.  Therefore 
Alice,  etc.,  *  because  she  knowingly  took  food  to 

them  in  the  wood  and  consented  to  them. 

125.  Richard  Hunte,  Reginald  {factor  rogonim^),  dJ\A  Sabina 
daughter  of  Reginald,  are  accused  of  the  same  harbouring.  And 
Richard  and  Reginald  come  and  defend  the  whole,  and  put 
themselves  on  the  country.  And  the  said  jurors  say  the  same  of 
Richard,  Reginald,  and  Sabina  as  of  Gorwic*  and  the  others,  and 
therefore  they  are  under  pledges,  and  Sabina  fled.  If  she  return 
let  her  be  under  pledges. 

126.  Roger  de  la  Forde  and  Felicia  his  daughter,  taken  for 
the  same,  in  the  same  manner  put  themselves  on  the  country. 
And  the  said  jurors  and  townships  do  not  suspect  them.  There- 
fore let  them  be  under  pledges  as  the  others  beforenamed, 

1 27.  Robert,  son  of  the  aforesaid  Roger  de  Ford,  accused  of 
the  same  harbouring,  has  fled.  He  is  not  in  frank-pledge,  for  he 
is  a  free  man.  He  is  not  suspected,  and  therefore  if  he  return  let 
him  be  under  pledges. 

128.  William  the  palmer  {le  /^^«»«^r),  accused  of  the  death  of 
a  certain  groom  {garcionis\  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and 
says  that  the  said  groom  was  with  him  and  left  him  sound  and 
uninjured,  and  he  knows  nothing  of  that  death.  Therefore  let 
him  be  liberated. 

129.  Roger  Wudecoc  and  Edith  his  wife  killed  Alexander  de 
Orchyard  and  have  fled.  And  Ascelina,  wife  of  Alexander,  sued 
in  the  third  county  court  against  them  ;  therefore  let  her  con- 
tinue her  suit  until  Roger  be  outlawed  and  Edith  be  waived.* 


1  The  roll  has  "  fuit;'  but  I  think  the  word  must  be  a  slip,  and  that  "  sint^ 
intended. 

*  Blank  in  original. 

»  I  find  a  difficulty  in  translating  this.  Can  it  mean  that  Reginald  was  the 
attendant  on  the  beacons?  or  was  he  a  maker  of  faggots  for  burning  ?  See  Ducange, 
under  Rogus.  In  i  Roi.  Claus.,  p.  553^,  occurs  the  following  : — *'De  busca  ad  rogos 
fadrmios.  Mandatum  est  Bnatio  de  Imula  sicut  alias  ei  mandaium  fuit  quod  habere 
faiiat  Roberto  Lenfaunt  et  sociis  suis  custoiibus  operacionis  castri  de  Salopesbir^  buscam 
in  foresta  de  Monte  Gileberti  ad  duos  vet  tres  rogos  faciendos  ad  operacionem  predicti 


castri  y 


*  The  words  used  are  ^^  utlagetur''  for  Roger  and  **  wavietur"  for  Edith. 
woman  could  not  be  outlawed,  for  she  never  was  **  in  law." 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  35 

Roger's  chattels  [are  worth]  20^.  11^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

130.  Thomas  de  Luneton,  accused  of  harbouring  thieves,  does 
not  come,  and  he  was  attached  by  Walter  de  Luneton,  Richard 
de  Nethercote,  William  de  Nethercote,  Herman  de  Marisco,  and 
William  the  reeve  of  Ake.  Therefore  they  are  all  in  mercy 
And  Thomas  is  suspected  of  the  receipt  of  John  and  Reginald 
de  Legh.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Let  his 
chattels  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King.  After- 
wards Walter  came  and  undertook  to  have  him  [Thomas]  on 
Saturday.  Afterwards  he  comes  and  twelve  jurors  say  that  they 
know  nothing  of  him  other  than  good  except  of  the  receipt  of 
John  and  this  by  force.  Therefore  let  him  be  liberated  and  be 
under  pledges. 

131.  Richard  de  Krues,  a  villein  of  Blakedone,  killed 
Herman  Dreng  of  Blakedone,  and  fled.  He  was  in  frank-pledge 
of  the  vill  of  Blakedone,  and  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  is 
suspected  ;  therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Inquire 
as  to  his  chattels. 

132.  Robert  de  Legh',  knight,  attached  because  John  de 
LeghV  a  fugitive,  was  thought  to  have  come  to  his  house,  comes 
and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  touching  everything,  and  be- 
cause he  was  not  in  the  country  on  the  day  when  this  was  said  to 
have  been  done.  And  twelve  jurors  testify  that  it  was  said  that 
John  was  there.  And  William  Bulloc  and  Ralph  de  Meriet  and 
the  constable  of  the  Bishop  at  Tanton'  came  armed  to  that  house 
and  took  Robert's  wife  and  his  son  and  led  them  to  Tanton  and 
there  put  the  son  in  prison  and  kept  him  there  for  one  month  in 
fetters.  And  Robert  seeks  justice  for  this  because  they  took 
his  wife  on  foot  to  Tanton  and  imprisoned  his  son  for  a  month 
although  they  might  have  found  sufficient  pledges.  And  no 
one  was  found  in  his  said  house  except  his  wife  and  a  certain 
other  woman  who  ate  with  her  in  the  dwelling  room  and  his 
said  son.  And  he  says  that  the  Bishop  would  not  release  his 
son  under  pledges  unless  John  de  Briwes  would  execute  to  him 
his  charter  that  all  his  land  should  pass  to  him  [the  Bishop]  if 
he  should  not  have  him  [Robert's  son]  on  his  [the  Bishop's] 
summons.  And  he  says  that  Ralph,  William,  and  the  others 
broke  open  his  chest  and  carried  off  his  deeds  and  other  things 

1  See  Xrs.  122  and  130. 


36  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

which  they  found.  And  Ralph  does  not  come,  and  William  is 
present  and  does  not  say  that  he  did  not  take  them  [the  wife  and 
son]  as  alleged,  but  he  defends  the  taking  of  the  chattels.  And 
the  twelve  jurors  being  questioned  whether  John  was  then  in  that 
house  say  that  they  do  not  know,  but  that  Ralph  de  Meriet  said 
that  he  found  John  outside  the  house  in  flight,  and  he  escaped 
beyond  the  ditch  (u/lra  fossata)^  and  that  Ralph  said  that  he  took 
Robert's  son  because  he  followed  John.  Questioned  whether  they 
know  any  ill  of  Robert,  his  son  and  wife,  they  say  that  they 
know  nothing  of  them  except  good.     Therefore  to  judgment 

The  Hundred  of  Kokre. 

133.  Knows  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Welles. 

134.  Melicent  {Mtlisanta)^  wife  of  Bernard  de  Dulticote, 
accused  of  burglary  in  the  houses  of  Matilda  and  Alan  [de] 
Dulticote,  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  herself  upon 
the  country.  And  the  twelve  jurors  know  nothing  positively  of 
her,  nor  were  any  stolen  things  found,  and  they  say  positively 
that  Bernard  is  a  lawful  man  {fidelis  est),  and  therefore  let  her 
be  liberated  and  be  committed  to  the  tithing  of  Duldincote.* 

135.  Bruweton,  concerning  the  men  who  killed  their  lord  and 
fled.» 

The  Burgh  of  Welles. 

136.  Knows  nothing  else. 

The  Hundred  of  Bath'. 

137.  Knows  nothing. 

The  [Hundred  of  struck  out]  Wascet'. 

138.  Knows  nothing. 


*  Dulcot. 
9 


Here  there  is  the  marginal  note  **/<?/  sup\**  which  evidently  means  that  the 
matter  is  discussed  clsewheie  :  sec  Nos.  231,  2^},  and  2;^j, 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  37 


The  Hundred  of  Norton'. 

139.  John  le  Mawere,  accused  of  breaking  into  the  church  of 
Stokes,  fled,  and  was  afterwards  taken  and  committed  to  his 
tithing  of  Stokes  of  Walter  de  Estleg*.  And  they  do  not  have 
him  [here],  and  therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  His  chattels  [are 
worth]  3^.  6rfl,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

140.  William  Heredes  of  Sipton,^  and  Thomas  his  son,  and 
Hugh  Lug,  accused  of  theft,  come  and  put  themselves  upon  the 
country.  And  the  twelve  jurors,  with  the  whole  hundred,  say 
on  their  oath  that  William  and  Thomas  are  thieves  of  horses 
and  other  things.  Therefore  let  them  be  hanged.  And  Hugh 
is  not  suspected  ;  therefore  let  him  be  under  pledges.  Inquire 
as  to  their  chattels. 

141.  Adam  the  palmer  (le  Paufner)  of  Cherleton  Mucegros,' 
accused  of  theft,  does  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  the  whole 
of  his  tithing  of  Cherleton,  and  therefore  they  are  in  rhercy,  and 
likewise  for  the  untruth  of  which  they  were  convicted  [similiter 
pro  mendaciotie  unde  ccnvicti  sunt),  and  he  is  suspected  of 
harbouring  thieves.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed.    Inquire  as  to  his  chattels. 

142.  William  and  Walter,  sons  of  Elias  de  Holt,  accused  of 
theft,  come  and  defend  the  whole,  and  put  themselves  on  the 
country.  And  the  twelve  jurors,  with  the  hundred,  say  upon 
their  oath  that  they  do  not  suspect  them.  Therefore  let  them 
be  liberated. 

143.  Gilbert  the  tanner,  taken  for  harbouring  poachers 
(bersatorum\  comes,  and  he  is  not  suspected  of  any  theft. 
Therefore  let  him  be  set  at  liberty  now  because  this  matter 
concerns  the  justices  of  the  forest.  The  justices  of  the  forest 
when  they  come  will  do  what  seems  to  them  right 

144.  Richard  Litecrost,  captured,  is  not  suspected  ;  therefore 
let  him  be  liberated. 

145.  Walter  de  la  Penne,  son  of  Emma,  accused  of  theft, 
fled.  He  was  committed  to  his  tithing  of  la  Penne.  And 
Walter  is  not  suspected.  Therefore  if  he  return  let  him  be  under 
pledges. 

The  remainiog  two  entries  on  this  membrane  are  too  illegible  in  places  to  repro 
dace. 

^  Shepton  Moctag'jf.  '  Charlie n  Mofgiave. 


38  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Memb.  2. 

The  Hundred  of  Lidyard  with  the  Manors  of 
Wellinton'  and  Wivelescumbe. 

146.  William  Smith  of  Hessod,  accused  of  harbouring 
William  his  son,  who  is  a  thief,  comes,  and  is  not  suspected. 
Therefore  let  him  be  set  at  liberty.  And  William  son  of 
William  is  suspected.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed.    He  was  not  resident,  and  therefore  was  not  in  tithing. 

147.  Stephen  de  Bosco,  brother  of  Richard  de  Bosco,  killed 
Jordan  Hawegod,  and  was  taken  and  imprisoned  at  Ivecestre. 
He  broke  gaol  and  escaped.  Therefore  if  he  should  be  found 
let  him  be  treated  as  if  outlawed.     To  judgment  for  the  escape. 

The  Hundred  of  Wintestok'. 

148.  Juliana  la  Russe  killed  Christiana,  daughter  of  Agnes, 
and  was  taken  and  imprisoned  at  Ivelcestre.  She  broke  gaol 
and  fled  to  the  monastery  (or  church  ?  monasterium),  and  abjured 
the  realm.  She  is  suspected.  Therefore  if  she  should  be  found 
let  her  be  treated  as  if  waived  {sicut  de  wavia), 

149.  Robert  Stede  was  taken,  in  the  time  when  Roger  de 
Forde  was  sheriff",  upon  suspicion  of  the  death  of  Simon  son  of 
Hordar",  whom  he  was  thought  to  have  killed.  And  Roger  de 
Forde  allowed  him  to  go  free.  The  twelve  jurors  know  not 
positively  whether  he  [Simon]  was  killed  or  not,  but  they  say 
that  two  chaplains,  to  wit,  Geoffry  de  Were  and  Thomas  son  of 
John  son  of  William,  were  last  [with  him]  in  the  vintry  of 
William  de  Sumerford  in  the  hundred  of  Bemstan,  and  there- 
fore inquiry  must  be  made  there.  And  be  it  known  that 
neither  the  King's  serjeant  nor  the  coroners  dared  to  enter  the 
hundred  to  make  inquest  by  reason  of  the  bailiff's  of  the  Bishop 
of  Bath.^ 

1 50.  Clarice,  maidservant  of  Stephen  de  Ebroctis,  was  found 
dead  in  her  bed  at  Mendep',  and  it  is  not  known  whether  she 
died  n^,t\xx3\\y  {si  extincta  futt)  or  in  what  manner  she  was  killed, 
because  she  had  no  wound,  and  no  one  is  suspected. 

^  There  is  a  marginal  note  "Z^  i  Hundr  de  Bemstan  "  =  lct  inquiry  be  made  in 
the  hundred  of  BemstaD\     See  No.  221. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  39 


151.  John  Swete  by  the  bone  {bi  ye  bone)  killed  Richard 
the  shepherd,  and  fled.  He  was  of  the  mainpast  of  the  Abbot 
of  Bruere  in  his  sheepcote  of  Bridie.*  Therefore  he  [the  Abbot] 
is  in  mercy,  and  he  [John]  is  suspected,  and  no  one  else.  There- 
fore let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

152.  Robert  Godesblescinge  and  William  Goseberd'  are 
accused  of  the  death  of  Hugh  de  la  Pille  and  Matilda  his  wife. 
Robert  Godesblescinge  comes  and  defends  the  whole  and  puts 
himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  And  twelve  jurors  of 
the  same  .  .  .  [hundred  and]  twelve  jurors  of  the  hundred 
of  Kingrebir*  and  twelve  jurors  of  the  hundred  of  Jatton'  and  the 
townships  of  Wrinatone,  Jatton',  Banewell,  Worle,  and  Wintc- 
stok  come  and  say  upon  their  oath  that  they  do  not  suspect 
him  of  that  death.  Therefore  let  him  be  liberated.  And  they 
say  that  the>'  suspect  William,  who  fled,  and  was  an  itinerant 
forester.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  And 
the  coroners  say  that  they  dared  not  enter  the  hundred  in  order 
that  they  might  the  better  make  inquisition  by  reason  of  the 

erf  the  Bishop  of  Bath.    Therefore  to  judgment 


The  Hundred  of  Jatton. 

153-  Stephen  Hedwcy  was  killed  at  Kiogeston',  and  Peter 
tfe  iow\cT  and  Gilbert  his  brother  were  accused  of  that  death. 
It  is  testified  by  the  whole  county  that  he  was  killed  at  the  time 
oe  the  vai'  and  the  coroners  testify  that  it  was  so.  Therefore  they 
kad  nothing.*  Moreover  the  justices  afterwards  came  before 
vi>:^22  nrffhing  was  done  concerning  that  death,  nor  was  any 
ZDcstSoD  made  of  iL  Therefore  the  twelve  jurors  arc  in  mercy 
i'js  ^Ise  pETCsentment,  and  the  township  of  Kingeston'  is  in 
oercv  for  default. 

154-  Walter  Gene  was  killed  in  the  fields  of  Wike,  and 
>»V-aTn  son  of  Thomas  de  Bacnell,  and  Roger  his  brother,  who 
bcjoag^  to  Brideciambe,  were  accused  of  that  death.     But  it  is 

by  the  whole  county  that  that  icquir\'  was  elsewhere 
csst  hczoTC  the  justices  on   the  last  c>Te.     Neither  the 
n  nor  the  others  know  ar;>-thing  positiveiy.      Therefore 
g  rh'n^  is  dooe  in  the  mattfr  for  the  presest. 


*A  • 


40  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


The  Hundred  of  KantintonV 

155.  A  certain  stranger,  and  it  is  unknown  who  he  was 
killed  Richard  de  Kantinton'  the  cook.  No  other  is  suspected. 
[Presentment  of]  Englishry  is  respited  until  the  coming  of  the 
justices  to  hold  all  pleas. 

The  Burgh  of  Stokes. 

156.  Knows  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Norhtperiton'. 

157.  William  Le  Bule,  accused  of  the  theft  of  a  crop,  has  fled. 
Therefore  if  he  should  return  let  him  be  under  pledges. 

158.  Richard  Artur*,  attached  for  cutting  a  certain  purse, 
comes  and  defends  the  cutting,  and  is  not  suspected.  Therefore 
let  him  be  under  pledges,  because  it  is  said  that  the  purse  was 
entangled  in  his  shirt  unknown  to  him. 

159.  Robert  Bakun  killed  William  Barat  and  fled.  He  was 
in  the  tithing  of  Richard  Forestar'  in  Neweton*,  and  therefore  [it 
is]  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  His  chattels  [are  worth]  Ss.  6d,^  for  which  the 
sheriff"  must  account. 

160.  Thomas  de  Haddon*,  accused  of  harbouring  the  brothers 
of  his  wife,  comes.  And  the  jurors  say  that  they  do  not  suspect 
him  of  harbouring  them  with  knowledge.  Therefore  let  him  be 
liberated. 

161.  Simon  the  foolish  one  {ie  Fot)^  a  vagrant  {itinerans\  is 
accused  of  theft  and  of  consorting  with  thieves  in  the  forest. 
He  is  suspected.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
He  had  no  chattels. 

162.  Robert  Coc,  accused  of  harbouring  the  brothers  of  his 
wife,  who  are  thieves,  comes,  and  he  is  not  suspected.  Therefore 
let  him  be  liberated. 

163.  A  certain  clerk,  a  thief,  was  taken  and  imprisoned  at 
Bruges  in  the  castle.  Therefore  let  the  matter  be  inquired  into 
there.  And  likewise  concerning  Henry  Mop  and  Ralph  Blund 
{Blundo\  who  are  accused  of  theft  and  receiving.* 

'  CanningtoB. 

•  There  is  a  marginal  note  here: — "  Z<^  i  Burgo  dt  Bntga^^^  i.e.  Biidgwater 
See  Not.  168  and  169. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  4I 


164.  Richard  Goky,  accused  of  the  death  of  Henry  Lihtfot, 

killed  at  Leng',  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself 

upon  the  country.     And   the  townships  of  Nordcury,  Bruges, 

Kriz,  and  Newenton,  and  twelve  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that 

they  suspect  no  one  of  that  death  save  the  same  Richard,  and 

they  say  positively  that  he  killed  him  [Henry].     Therefore  let 

him  be  hanged.     Inquire  as  to  his  chattels.     The  township  of 

Leng*  and  the  twelve  jurors  at  first  presented  that  a  certain 

Robert  Young  (juvenis)  was  thought  to  have  killed  him  [Henry]. 

Afterwards  they  come   and  confess  that  they  did  this  at   the 

instance  of  Roger  Baryl  the  serjeant  of  the  hundred.    Therefore 

let  him  be  in  custody,  and  the  twelve  jurors  and  the  township  of 

ieng'  are  in  mercy  for  their  false  statement.     The  amercement 

of  the  jurors  is  pardoned.     The  coroners  record  that  the  bailiffs 

of  the  Abbot  of  Athelney  do  not  allow  them  to  summon  the 

liundred  at  Leng*  that  they  may  make  inquests  or  to  make  any 

inquest,  and  they  have  no  warrant  for  that.     Therefore  let  the 

franchise  [of  the  Abbot]  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the 

King. 

165.  Jocelin  Huckel  of  Norhtperiton',  taken  for  harbouring 
thieves,  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country.  The  twelve  jurors  and  the  townships  of  Newentone, 
Hunteworth,  Norhtperiton',  and  Hamme  come  and  say  upon 
their  oath  that  they  suspect  him  of  harbouring  thieves  and  of 
consorting  with  thieves.  Therefore  let  him  be  hanged.  Inquire 
as  to  his  chattels. 

The  Burgh  of  Bruges  Walterl* 

166.  Robert  Koo,  bereman  of  Bruges,  killed  Hugh  Lof,  and 
fled  to  the  church  and  abjured  the  realm.  He  lived  at  {vianens 
apud)  Bruges,  and  was  without  frank-pledge.  Therefore  the 
whole  township  is  in  mercy.     Let  him  be  taken  if  found. 

167.  Walter  son  of  Edith  Wellenewif  was  found  killed  with- 
out Werne  in  the  manor  of  Sumerton'  and  she  appealed  John  de 
Broc  therefor.  Let  it  be  inquired  into  in  the  (manor  struck  out) 
hundred  of  Sumerton'.^ 

*  Bridgwater. 

'  Prior  to  the  Great  Charter,  a  woman  could  only  appeal  in  the  case  of  injury 
personal  to  herself  and  of  the  death  of  her  husband.  (Glan.,  Iil>.  xiv,  c.  I,  3,  and  6.) 
This  rule  was  confirmed  by  the  Charter.  I>ut  in  Aubrey  of  Hockwold*s  case 
(Coroner's   Rolls,  Scld.   Soc.,  p.    18)  in  56  Hen.  III.,  several  men  were  api)ealed 

G 


42  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

1 68.  Two  thieves  who  passed  themselves  off  as  clerks^  were 
received  at  Bruges,  first  in  the  house  of  Ralph  Glowe,  secondly 
in  the  house  of  Roger  Glowe,  and  thirdly  in  the  house  of  Hugh 
the  miller,  who  all  come  and  put  themselves  on  the  country. 
And  the  jurors  and  the  township  say  that  they  do  not  suspect 
them  of  harbouring  the  thieves,  knowing  them  to  be  such. 
Therefore  let  them  be  liberated.  And  one  of  the  clerical  thieves 
was  taken  and  imprisoned  in  the  castle  of  Bruges,  and  he  broke 
gaol  and  escaped.  Therefore  ...  [to  judgment  ?]  for  the 
escape.     And  if  he  should  be  found  let  him  be  taken.* 

169.  William  de  Audres'  and  Ralph  Blund  {Blundus)^ 
suspected  of  theft,  have  fled.  They  abode  in  the  vill  of  .  .  . 
without  frank-pledge.  Therefore  it  [the  township]  is  in  mercy. 
And  they  are  suspected.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.* 

The  Hundred  of  Kingesbir'. 
170. 

This  entry  is  in  many  respects  illegible.  Robert  the  tithingman  of  Broml^' 
and  Matilda  his  wife  are  accused  of  harbouring  thieves,  and  they  put  themselves  on 
the  country.     So  much  clearly  appears.     Robert  seems  to  have  been  guilty. 

Memb,  2d, 
The  Hundred  of  Norhtcur'. 

171.  John  son  of  Gilbert  Gule,  and  Robert  de  Gyvemy  and 
Warin  and  Philip  his  brothers,  accused  of  theft,  do  not  come, 
and  nothing  is  positively  known  about  them.  Therefore  let 
them  be  in  peace.  Moreover  it  is  testified  by  the  knights  of  the 
county  that  this  charge  was  made  in  the  time  of  the  war,  and 
that  they  are  lawful  men. 

for  the  death  of  her  son.  The  men  were  exacted  in  the  county  court,  and  the  King's 
writ  removing  the  appeal  from  the  county  court  to  Westminster,  "for  Ralph  of 
(ioldington  the  coroner  is  Aubrey's  kinsman,  and  it  is  said  he  &vours  her  in  this 
plea,"  is  set  out  on  p.  21.  In  the  same  volume,  p.  35,  we  find  the  King,  by  his  writ, 
ordering  the  observance  of  the  Charter,  that  no  person  be  arrested  on  the  appeal  of  a 
woman  save  for  the  death  of  her  husband,  nevertheless  a  day  was  given  to  the 
appellor,  w  ho  appealed  the  slayer  of  her  brother,  to  appear  before  the  justices.  This 
was  in  4  Ed.  I.  In  this  case  the  appellee,  though  four  times  exacted,  was  not 
ouilawcd  in  the  county  court  by  reason  of  this  command  of  the  King. 

•   *  *  qui  se  fee  f  runt  clericos. " 

-  See  No.  163. 

•"   Ibid. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  43 


171^?.  Walter  de  la  Breche  and  Robert  and  Elias  his 
brothers,  accused  of  burglary  of  the  house  of  Robert  dc  Bello 
Campo,  come  and  defend  everything,  and  put  themselves  upon 
the  country.  The  twelve  jurors  and  the  townships  and  the  jurors 
of  the  hundred  of  Abbedic  come  and  say  upon  their  oath  that 
they  do  not  suspect  them.  Therefore  let  them  be  liberated  under 
pledges. 

All  the  jurors  are  in  mercy  for  their  false  presentment* 

172.  Richard  le  Futur'  killed  Roger  Doket  and  fled.  He 
abode  in  Lillesdon'  in  the  tithing  of  Walter  de  Hereford*. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  No  other  is  suspected.  Therefore  let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Richard's  chattels  [are  worth] 
4^.,  for  which  the  sheriff"  must  account. 

172a.  Osbert  son  of  John  de  Stokes  killed  Thomas  son  of 
Beatrice  de  Thome  and  fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Stokes. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  ;  therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

173.  Martin  de  la  More,  Robert  his  brother,  Robert  son  of 
Jordan  Gulie,  and  Gilbert  Odde,  accused  of  theft  and  of  harbour- 
ing thieves,  come  and  defend  the  whole,  and  put  themselves 
upon  the  country.  An  inquest  was  held  at  Nortcuri  by  Jordan 
Oliver,  and  his  associates  sent  for  that  purpose,  and  they  all  say 
that  [Martin  and  the  others]  are  thieves.  Therefore  [to  judg- 
ment (in  the  margin)]. 

Then  fbUows  a  statement  of  their  chattels.  The  chattels  of  "  Gilbert "  are  worth 
i8j.,  of  "Robert  Gulie"  7s,  &/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  account.  "( filbert" 
(apparently  a  mistake  for  Martin)  had  no  chattels.  The  chattels  of  the  other  KolK;rt 
jLie  stated  to  have  been  worth  gs.  6J.,  but  this  entry  is  struck  out  and  a  note  added  : 
••  dicitur  pro  dkto  uxori  ICoberii" 

Hundred  of  Wileton'.' 

174.  Reginald  Gupil  of  Kantekeshavd',^'  suspected  of  theft, 
fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Litelcantekeshaved,  and  therefore 
it  is  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Therefore  let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

175.  Aldina  de  Pemesfeld,  attached  for  harbourin;^  male- 
factors, is  not  suspected.     Therefore  let  her  be  liberated. 

176.  William  Berd,  suspected  of  theft,  fled.     He  was  in  the 

'  This  appears  to  be  a  separate  entry  upon  the  roll.     Oti/rre  to  what  it  refer  1, 
•  WiUiton.  '  •  C/uantock<head. 


44  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


tithing  of  the  vill  of  Radingeton*.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
He  is  suspected  of  more  thefts.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

177.  William  Ded  of  Stolce  Gunner^  killed  Randal  de 
Hicford*  and  was  taken  in  the  act  and  imprisoned  at  Ivelcestr*, 
and  he  escaped  with  other  prisoners.  Therefore  if  he  should  be 
found  let  him  be  treated  as  outlawed.  His  chattels  are  worth 
gs.  2d.,  for  which  Peter  de  M[allo]  must  answer. 

178.  Two  thieves  with  two  stolen  horses  were  being  chased, 
so  that  they  left  the  horses  before  the  house  of  John  de  Reigni. 
And  the  horses  were  taken  and  no  one  followed  them.  There- 
fore [the  horses]  are  the  King's.  Their  value  is  8^.,  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  account. 

179.  Concerning  the  malefactors  of  the  manor  of  Crawe- 
cumb'*  who  are  taken.  (In  the  margin  is  '*  loquend'* :  this  must 
be  further  discussed.) 

The  Hundred  of  Chiw. 

180.  Robert  Woderove,  suspected  of  theft,  comes  and  de- 
fends the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and 
ill.  The  jurors  and  four  townships  of  this  hundred  know  nothing 
concerning  him. 

181.  Gilbert  Wudecot  and  Richard  his  brother  killed 
William  son  of  Wodward,  and  fled.  They  were  in  the  tithing 
of  the  vill  of  Chiw,  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  And  Alwina 
mother  of  [William]  made  suit  for  his  death  in  three  county 
[courts].  Therefore  let  her  suit  proceed  until  they  are  outlawed. 
They  had  no  chattels. 

182.  John  Herolf  killed  Roger  de  Bremhuir  with  an  arrow 
and  fled.  He  abode  in  the  vill  of  Sutton  without  frank-pledge. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  No  other  is  sus- 
pected.    Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

The  Hundred  of  Welewe. 

183.  Robert  Dun,  suspected  of  theft,  fled,  and  was  in  the 
tithing  of  the  vill  of  Cumb'  of  Thomas  de  Haweie  ;  therefore  it 
is  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Therefore  let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

^  Siogumber.  2  Crowcombe. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  45 


184.  Henry  Frankelain  (?  the  franklin)  brother  of  the  same 
[Robert  Dun],  accused  of  harbouring  him,  comes  and  is  sus- 
pected. And  the  township  of  Cumb'  [of]  Thomas  de  Havveie 
presented  him  as  a  harbourer  of  his  brother  and  afterwards 
retracted.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.     Let  him  be  liberated. 

185.  Roger,  a  man  of  Devon  {Devoniens),  killed  Alvred  de 
Dunkerton,  and  was  taken  and  imprisoned  in  the  vill  of  Welewe. 
He  escaped  from  the  prison  of  the  Earl  of  Salisbury  in  Welewe ; 
therefore  the  township  is  in  mercy.  He  escaped  to  the  monas- 
tery, confessed  the  death,  and  abjured  the  realm.  His  chattels 
[are  worth]  6^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  account. 

The  Hundred  of  Abbedik'. 

186.  Thomas  de  la  Pitte  killed  a  certain  forester  [named] 
Adam  Brun  and  fled.  He  was  in  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Hile- 
cumb*.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected.  Let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

187.  Randal  le  Ball'  (?  the  bailiff),  accused  of  theft,  fled.  He 
was  in  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Curi  Malet.  It  is  therefore  in 
mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

188.  William  de  Cappilond'  killed  Robert  Coppe  and  fled. 
And  Geoffry  de  Kuri  was  accessory  with  him  (fuit  in  fortia  cum 
0),  and  they  fled.  William  was  in  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Kuri 
Malet.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Geoffry  was  of  the  mainpast 
of  Richard  del  Estr',  who  has  died.  Both  are  suspected  of  that 
killing.  Let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  They  had  no 
chattels. 

189.  Walter  the  fair  haired  (Albus^)  abjured  the  land  of  our 
lord  the  King  in  the  time  of  King  John  for  the  death  of  Robert 
the  basket  maker  {Corbiller),  and  afterwards  returned  and  abode 
in  the  vill  of  Stineleg'.  The  township  knew  this  and  did  not 
take  him.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  dealt  with  as  if 
outlawed.  His  chattels  are  worth  2  marks,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

190.  Roger  le  Syur  of  Cumbe  killed  William  the  tailor  by 
a  stone  and  fled.     He  was  a  vagrant  {ttinerans),  and  is  sus- 

»  He  is  called  "  Walter  Blundus  "  in  the  Amercement  Roll  (No.  383).     The  two 
descriptions  taken  together  seem  to  mean  "  the  fair  or  yellow  haired." 


46  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

pected  of  that  death.     Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.     His 
chattels  [are  worth]  8^1,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

191.  Robert  Wade,  suspected  of  theft,  fled  to  the  church 
and  abjured  the  realm.    He  was  of  Devon.     He  had  no  chattels. 

192.  Owain'  and  Richard  son  of  Gervase  de  Bikehall  killed 
William  son  of  the  parson  of  Thorn',  and  they  fled.  They  were 
of  the  mainpast  of  Gervase  their  father,  who  has  died.  Richard 
was  afterwards  hanged  for  theft.  Let  Owain'  be  exacted  and 
outlawed. 

The  Hundred  of  Bulestan'. 

193.  Robert  and  Luke  sons  of  William  Walens  of  Staweie, 
accused  of  consorting  with  malefactors,  come  and  defend  every- 
thing, and  put  themselves  on  the  country  for  good  and  ill. 
And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  townships  of  Curi  Malet,  Fife- 
hide,  Hile,  and  Kathangre  say  that  they  are  lawful  men.  There- 
fore let  them  be  liberated. 

194.  Walter  Wakewal,  taken  upon  the  appeal  of  a  certain 
woman  for  robbery,  was  put  in  gaol,  and  escaped  with  other 
prisoners.  Therefore  let  him  be  treated  as  if  outlawed,  because 
it  is  testified  that  he  is  the  worst     He  had  no  chattels. 

195.  Roger  Godefrei,  accused  of  theft,  comes  and  defends  the 
whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  And  twelve  jurors 
and  the  aforesaid  four  townships  say  that  they  do  not  suspect 
him.     Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 

196.  Herbert  Quarrel  killed  Walter  de  quercu  of  Douliz*  and 
fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Ralph  Wak'  of  Douliz.  Therefore 
it  is  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

197.  Peter  Waingeben  and  John  the  ploughman  {carucarius)^ 
accused  of  being  present  where  Herbert  killed  him  [Walter  in 
previous  entry],  come  and  defend  the  whole,  and  put  themselves 
upon  the  country.  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  townships 
aforesaid  say  positively  that  they  did  not  kill  him.  Therefore 
let  them  be  liberated. 

198.  Odo  de  Huleham,  accused  of  harbouring  thieves,  comes 
and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  for 
good  and  for  ill.     And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  townships  of 

^  Dowlish. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  47 


Elmenistre,'  Pukinton',*  Bo     .     .     .     and  Doucliz  say  that  he 
is  not  guilty.     Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 

The  Hundred  of  Hareclive. 

199.  James  the  forester,  accused  of  the  robbery  of  the  house 
of  Henry  de  Budecumb',  does  not  come.  He  is  suspected.  Let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  wandering  about  a  little 
time  ago  with  John  de  Florentin  the  constable  ifuit  itin\ans 
altqfl  cu  Joke  de  Florentin  constabii.) 

200.  Philip  the  shepherd  and  William  Fugcl,  accused  of 
theft,  have  fled.  They  were  in  the  tithing  of  Adam  de  Eston  in 
Elston.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  They  are  suspected.  Let 
them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Philip  s  chattels  are  worth  1 2d., 
William's  \%d.    William's  2s.  6d.,  Philip's     .    .     .     [\s.  lod.  ?Y 

The  next  entry  is  too  fragmentary  for  reproduction. 

Memb,  3. 

The  Hundred  of  Harethurn'. 

201.  Thomas  de  Feregare  of  Holewall,  accused  of  theft, 
comes  and  defends  ever>'thing,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country  for  good  and  ilL  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  town- 
ships of  Holei^-all,  Hengestering,  Trente,  and  StawcU  say 
positively  that  he  is  a  thief  [guilty]  of  many  thefts.  To  judg- 
ment.* 

202.  William  Penne  of  Cherleton  killed  Walter  Aungerin' 
with  a  certain  knife  and  fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill 
of  Cherleton.  Therefore  it  is  in  merc>'.  He  is  suspected.  Let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  \%s.  \d.^ 
for  which  the  sheriff"  must  account* 

1  DmizBter.  '  Pnckingtoo. 

-  Tbesc  add::»cs  were  00  doabt  doe  to  later  information.     The  values  thus  stated 
pc!  El  ibe  scbedole  (Xo.  3831  a!  a  fs^^re  which  ii  partly  UltgiMe :  it  may  \gt 
ȣ.  which  wodd  perhaps  be  a  slip  of  the  pen  for  6:.  \od.     A'^y-utrAly  it  was 
ifT  to  hare  more  ijx^:iiTy  isade.  with  the  res -It  that  uf^^n  'he  return  fA 
■be  3qi2Ktijc  h  appeared  thai  WiLiari's  chattel*  were  wyrh  yet  atothcr  i:.  asKl 
r'^flif"*    ios.      These   fs^^G  were   theref:«e  pot   is   the   tip^Iementajy   schectle 

•  Aifud.  is  the  Traigi:!. 

•  Is  the  maj^  is  a  zic^e— let  irxjsiry  be  mad*^  as  tc  hii  cha.tt*:l^.     The  re?-jlt  of 
i:*,»iij  appears   see  No.  385/  safer  •*  W=,  Pesjiia^"     The  lilue  leiag  tzrjatd 

ii  ge-j  ]=.\-j  the  £«:  Asxzxxmfxr.  Roll  (Na  383^ 


48  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

203.  William  de  Cumb',  brother  of  Maurice  the  chaplain, 
killed  Roger,  the  Devon  man,  and  fled.  He  was  not  in  frank- 
pledge because  he  was  a  vagrant  {itinerans)}  He  is  suspected 
of  that  death.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
His  chattels  [were  worth]  2J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
account. 

204.  Roger  son  of  Emma  was  found  killed  in  the  fields  of 
Corston,  and  William  Stul'  was  attached  for  that  death.  He 
comes  and  is  not  suspected.  Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 
No  one  knows  who  killed  him. 

205.  William  Godinogb  struck  Adam  Coffin  with  a  certain 
knife,  and  fled  to  the  monastery  (or  church?  fnonasterium), 
because  he  thought  he  [Adam]  would  die,  and  he  has  abjured 
[the  realm].    Adam  recovered,  and  has  taken  no  harm. 

The  Burgh  of  Mileburn. 

206.  Richard  Pocok'  was  found  killed  in  the  fields  of  Sire- 
burne  in  Dorset,  and  Arnold  Dule  was  attached  because  he 
was  wont  to  entertain  him  [Richard]  at  his  house,  and  he  comes. 
The  jurors  of  this  hundred  [and  the  jurors]  of  Harethurn  and  the 
jurors  of  Mileburn  say  that  he  is  not  guilty.  And  because  he 
[Richard]  was  found  in  the  county  of  Dorset  let  it  be  considered 
there,  and  let  fuller  inquiry  be  there  made.  Afterwards  a  fuller 
inquiry  was  made  in  the  hundred  of  Sirebum*. 

207.  Walter  le  Wykere'  killed  William  the  foolish  one  (/e 
Fol)  in  the  vill  of  Mileburn  and  fled.  The  jurors  say  that  he  was 
killed  after  dinner  at  a  wrestling  {ad  luctani)  in  the  middle  of 
the  town,  and  because  they  [the  township]  did  not  pursue  him, 
or  take  him,  they  are  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  that  death. 
Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

The  Hundred  of  Keynesham. 

208.  Henry  de  Stanton,  accused  of  robbery  in  Ferberg'  and 
in  Hundesture,'  whereof  a  certain  Margery,  who  was  bound  {que 
ligata  fuit\  appealed  him,  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and 

^  That  is,  was  not  a  resident.     He  had  no  settled  abode  in  the  place. 
'  "twVa"  or  **wy^a,"  a  country  house  or  farm  ;  **  wicarius    ot  *^^  wikarius^^  a 
keeper  of  a  wica  ;  pace  C.  T.  Martin. 
^  Fannborough  and  Houndstrect. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  49 

puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  And  twelve 
jurors  and  the  four  townships  of  ^Stanton',  Preston',  Chaleworth, 
and  Cumton'*  say  positively  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  let 
hinn  be  liberated  and  be  under  pledge*. 

209.  William  Bagga  and  Geoffrey  his  man  were  killed  at 
Hawode,  in  the  wood  {nemore)  of  Roger  de  Clifford.  It  is  not 
known  who  killed  them.  Therefore  let  the  matter  remain  for 
discussion  against  another  coming  [of  the  justices]. 

210.  William  the  shepherd  (bercarius)  of  Dene  killed 
Geoffry  Doggesem  and  fled.  He  abode  in  the  vill  of  Cumton'* 
without  frank-pledge.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  is  sus- 
pected of  that  death.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He 
had  no  chattels. 

The  City  of  Bath. 

211.  Robert  the  merchant  of  Dorkecestr  was  found  with  a 
little  (filo)?  Because  he  was  pursued  b)'^  no  one.  nor  is  any- 
thing known  of  him,  he  being  a  stranger,  let  him  be  liberated. 

The  Hundred  of  Hundesburg.' 

212.  Nicholas  the  gardener  killed  Gunnild'  de  Norton 
because  she  would  not  permit  him  to  rape  her  daughter,  and 
fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Wiggeberg'* ; 
therefore  it  is  in  mercy  The  daughter  sued  in  three  county 
[courts].  Let  her  prosecute  her  suit  and  Nicholas  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  Inquire  as  to  his  chattels  in  the  tenement  where 
he  abode  {sup  iefl  ubi  mansit). 

The  Hundred  of  Frome. 

213.  John  Levething'  the  harper  and  Geoffry  the  harper, 
suspected  of  theft,  fled.  And  because  they  are  suspected  of 
many  thefts,  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  They  were  not 
in  tithing  because  they  were  itinerants,  to  wit,  minstrels.  Alice 
formerly  the  wife  of  Randal  the  harper,  is  suspected  because  she 
harboured  them.  Let  her  be  exacted  and  waived.  They  had 
no  chattels. 

* — '  Stanton  Drew  or  Stanton  Prior,  Prist  on,  Chelvcod,  and  Compton  Dando. 
«  This  place  is  called  "  Cumpton*  Godfr* "  in  the  Amercement  Roll  (No.  38 j). 
'  I  must  confess  my  ignorance  of  the  meaning  of  this  word  in  this  connexion. 
*  Wigborough. 

H 


50  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


214.  Gilbert  the  miller  of  Bekinton  and  Henry  son  of 
Ralph  of  Linham,  suspected  of  theft,  fled.  Henry  was  in  the 
tithinsr  of  the  vill  of  Wandestre*  of  Oliver  Avenal ;  therefore 
it  is  in  mercy.  And  because  they  are  suspected  let  them  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.     They  had  no  chattels. 

215.  Adam  de  Bradeleg'  killed  Peter  son  of  Gervase  de 
Glasford'  with  a  certain  cudgel  and  fled.  He  was  an  itinerant 
carter  {carectarius  iiinerans)  and  is  suspected.  Therefore  let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

The  Hundred  of  Cruk'. 

216.  Simon  de  Shiteroc,  taken  for  the  death  of  John  de 
Cruk',  comes  and  defends  the  whole.  The  bailiff  of  our  lord  the 
King  of  the  hundred  says  that  when  he  took  him  on  the  morrow 
after  the  deed  was  done  he  confessed  that  death  before  him 
[the  bailiff]  and  many  other  men,  and  he  produces  a  whole 
tithing  which  testify  this.  And  Simon  afterwards  testified  that 
he  was  present  at  the  killing,  and  that  Elias,  brother  of  the  dead 
man,  killed  him.  And  being  asked  what  he  did,  said  that  he 
did  nothing,  nor  showed  others,  nor  raised  the  hue.  And  twelve 
jurors  say  positively  that  Simon  and  no  other  killed  him.  And 
because  the  bailiff  produces  suit  that  he  confessed  before  him, 
let  him  [Simon]  be  hanged.     Inquire  as  to  his  chattels.' 

2 1 7.  Ralph  son  of  Hubert  le  Taile,  accused  of  theft,  fled.  He 
was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Meriet.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
And  because  he  is  suspected  of  many  thefts  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  loj.,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  account. 

218.  Adam  de  Waldreresheng  killed  Richard  le  Stuvard  and 
fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Waiford.  Therefore  it  is 
in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  gs,  4^/.,  for 
which  Peter  de  Mallo  must  answer. 

219.  Geoffry  le  Taillur  of  Erneshill,  accused  of  theft,  fled. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Meriet.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  His  chattels  were  worth  4^.,  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  answer. 

'  VVanstrow.  2  Marginal  note  '' Susp\  Inqir  de  catalT '^ 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  5 1 


The  Hundred  of  Bernestan'. 

220.  Stephen  Walls'  and  Walter  le  Jay  are  accused  of  the 
death  of  William  Everard.  [This  must  be  more  fully  inquired 
into  in  the  Hundred  of  Brente.*" 


221.  Simon  le  Horder  was 


wounded*],  and  it  is  not  known 


whether  he  was  killed  or  not,  or  in  what  way  it  happened,  but 
Robert  Stede  was  attached  for  that  death.  And  because  it  is 
not  known  whether  [Simon]  was  killed  or  not,  let  the  whole 
matter  remain  to  be  discussed  on  the  coming  of  the  justices  in 
eyre. 

The  Hundred  of  Karenton'.* 

222.  William  Stonman  is  suspected  of  theft.  Let  him  be 
taken  because  he  is  suspected  of  many  thefts. 

223.  William  Fauder  and  John  Portman,  suspected  of  robbery 
of  the  church  of  Dunestor'  and  of  the  money  {denar)  of  Ralph 
le  Tort  and  of  other  misdeeds,  have  fled.  They  abode  in  the 
vill  of  Dunestor'  without  frank-pledge.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
And  because  they  are  suspected  of  many  thefts,  let  them  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.     They  had  no  chattels. 

224.  Robert  de  Ar*  killed  Walter  the  chaplain  of  Ar  and 
was  taken.  He  comes  and  defends  the  whole  as  a  clerk.  The 
jurors  say  positively  that  he  killed  him  [Walter],  and  that  he 
wounded  Gervase  the  chaplain's  son,  who  is  present  and  says 
the  same.  And  because  he  is  a  clerk  let  judgment  be  respited. 
Let  him  be  in  custody.     Nobody  claims  him.* 

225.  William  de  Hulle  killed  Ralph  de  Hullc  and  fled.  He 
was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Withicumbe.  Therefore  it  is 
in  mercy.  No  one  else  is  suspected.  Therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  His  chattels  were  worth  6s.  4^/.,  for 
which  Peter  de  Mallo  must  answer. 

226.  Thomas  Leggegode,  suspected  of  theft,  fled.  He  was 
not  in  frank  pledge,  because  he  was  a  forester.  Because  he  is 
suspected  of  many  thefts,  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

*  Marginal  note. 

*  Word  obscure.     Quitre  acieratus^  wounded  by  an  axe.     See  No.  149. 

*  Carhampton.  "*  Oare. 

*  That  is,  no  ordinary  seeks  to  take  him  out  of  the  hands  of  the  King's  justices. 


52  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


The  Burgh  of  Dunestor*. 

227.  Knows  nothing  further. 

Memb,  id. 

The  Burgh  of  Staweie. 

228.  Knows  nothing  beyond  the  aforesaid. 

The  Burgh  de  Capite  Montis.^ 

229.  Jordan  Chagge  killed  William  Aleavin  and  fled.  He 
was  in  the  tithing  of  the  Burgh  de  Capite  montis.  Therefore  it 
is  in  mercy.  And  Alice  wife  of  William  has  sued  in  three 
county  [courts].  Therefore  let  her  continue  her  suit  until 
[Jordan]  is  outlawed.  His  chattels  are  worth  22j.,  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  answer.     [He  has]  a  house. 

The  Hundred  of  Portburi. 

230.  Knows  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Briwton'. 

231.  Robert  the  miller  of  Middelton  and  Robert  his  son 
killed  Geoffry  de  Albo  Monasterio,  and  fled  to  the  monastery. 
They  confessed  the  death  and  abjured  the  realm.  Their 
chattels  were  worth  1 2^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

232.  Reginald  le  Nappere,  accused  of  the  death  of  Gregory 
the  shepherd  {Berkar^),  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts 
himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  And  twelve  jurors 
and  the  four  townships  of  Brutton,  Wike,  Gerlingeton',  and 
Redlinch * 

233.  Herbert  Drail,  accused  of  the  death  of  the  beforenamed 
Geoffry  and  of  theft,  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts 

>  This  ancient  burgh  is  mentioned  in  No.  504  in  this  volome  under  the  French 
form  of  Chefdelmunt.  It  was  probably  the  Doneham  of  the  Domesday  Survey,  and 
it  almost  certainly  corresponds  with  the  modem  Downend  in  Puriton.  Chedesmund 
is  mentioned  as  a  hamlet  in  1280.  (Placita  de  Quo  Warranto^  p.  690.  Sec  also 
Collinson,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  396,  397.) 

*  The  entry  ends  abruptly  thus.     See,  further.  No.  236. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  S3 

himself  [upon  the  country].     Twelve  jurors  and  the  four  town- 
ships aforesaid * 

234.  And  Godfrey  le  Due,  accused  of  harbouring  thieves, 
comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country. 

235.  Hamo  Wrige  of  Diggenescove,*  accused  of  theft,  comes 
and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.* 

236.  Eudes  de  Wolton',*  accused  of  harbouring  thieves, 
comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country.  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  aforesaid  four  townships 
say  that  Reginald  (see  No.  232)  is  not  guilty  because  Gervase 
son  of  Walter,  who  fled,  killed  him  [Gregory  the  shepherd],  and 
he  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Almundeford.*  Therefore  it 
is  in  mercy.     Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

237.  Concerning  Herbert  Drail,  they  say  that  he  is  guilty  of 
the  death  of  his  lord  (Geoffry  de  Albo  Monasterio:  see  Nos. 
231  and  233)  and  of  many  thefts.  Therefore  let  him  be 
hanged.* 

238.  Concerning  Hamo  Wrige  and  Eudes  de  Wolton',  they 
know  nothing  but  what  is  good  and  lawful.  Therefore  let  them 
be  liberated. 

239.  Concerning  Godfrey  le  Due,  they  say  that  they  know 
that  he  harboured  his  son,  who  was  a  thief.  Therefore  let  him 
be  hanged.* 

240.  Waldrick  de  Hunewic*  and  Emma  his  wife  were 
attached  for  the  death  of  a  certain  merchant  killed  in  Waldrick's 
house.  Emma  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  herself 
upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  Waldrick  does  not  come, 
having  fled.  He  was  attached  by  Payn  de  Nortb'ga,  Roger 
the  skinner  {pelliparius)  of  the  same  vill,  William  the  reeve  of 
Hunewik',  Osbert  de  la  Brok',  Robert  Cokerel,  Hugh  Long, 
Ralph  son  of  Peter,  William  de  Viscunta,  William  son  of 
William  the  Reeve,  Colin  {colenianus)  the  hayward,  Alfred 
de  la  Broke,  Edward  son  of  Godwin  ;  therefore  they  all  are  in 
mercy.  The  aforesaid  jurors  and  the  aforesaid  four  town- 
ships say  positively  that  Wandric  is  not  guilty  because  he  was 

'  The  entry  ends  here,  and  the  next  two  entries  run  on  successively.     The  entries 
hereabouts  are  much  mixed.  '  Discove. 

*  Sec  Na  238.  **  Almsford. 

•  There  is  a  marginal  note  here — **  adjuJ.'"' 

•  Ibid. 


54  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

not  in  the  house  that  night,  but  that  Solomon  and  Osbert, 
Emma's  brothers,  killed  [the  merchant],  and  Emma  was  a  con- 
senting party,  and  was  then  ill,  and,  otherwise  than  under  pressure 
by  the  bailiff  after  six  weeks  from  the  deed,  she  did  not 
reveal  the  matter.  Therefore  it  is  suspected  that  she  is  guilty 
of  consent,  and  [to  judgment*].  [She  was]  in  custody  until  she 
brought  forth,  and  afterwards  she  fled  And  let  Waldrick  be 
under  pledges  if  he  should  return.  And  Hamo  and  Eudes  were 
taken,  and  escaped  from  gaol  with  other  prisoners.  And 
Solomon  was  aften^^ards  taken  and  beheaded.  As  for  Eudes, 
let  him  be  treated  as  if  outlawed.* 

241.  Roger  le  Blake  of  Woleton,  accused  of  theft,  fled.  He 
abode  in  Cherlinton'  without  frank-pledge.  Therefore  [the 
vill]  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  is 
suspected  of  many  thefts.     He  had  no  chattels. 

242.  Robert  Pipelere  of  Bruweton',  accused  of  theft,  fled. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Westbruton.  Therefore  it  is 
in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

243.  Henry  the  ploughman  {canuator)  of  Middelton  and 
Adam  the  tailor  of  Bruton  and  Geoffry  tJie  cobbler,  attached 
for  injuring  (Jbrusura^)  a  certain  chapel,  are  not  suspected. 
Therefore  let  them  be  liberated. 

The  Hundred  of  Andredesfeld'. 

244   Knows  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Bruweton'. 

245.  Robert  Bondedut  and  John  Sewarius  (?  the  sewer), 
accused  of  harbouring  thieves,  are  not  suspected,  and  therefore 
they  are  liberated.* 

^  ad  jud\  in  the  margin.  The  words  which  follow,  •*/«  atslcdia  dtmec  feptt 
p  fu^  ",  w-erc  added  later.  I  cannot  make  anything  of  *^  feref^erU"  so  treat  it  as  a 
slip  {or  pfp€rit. 

'  Qu*jtre  whether  "  Hamo  and  Ewdes  "  are  not  mistakes  for  **  Salom'  and  Osb'." 
Hamo  and  Eudes  were  tried  and  discharged  :  see  No.  238. 

*  Glossaries  render  this  word  as  *'  bruising  "  in  the  ordinary  sense  :  see  Ducange, 
amongst  others.     See  No.  277,  where  the  word  is  used  in  conneciicn  with  a  house. 

*  This  case  seems  to  have  been  omitted  from  its  proper  place  ^ith  the  other  cases 
of  the  hundred.  Perhaps  it  was  overlooked  or  not  ready  when  the  other  matters 
relating  to  the  hundred  were  being  considered. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  55 


The  Hundred  of  Chiwton'. 

246.  John  Burrell,  attached  upon  suspicion  {^pre  suspicione) 
is  not  suspected.     Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 

The  Hundred  of  Whitstan. 

247.  Richard  le  Franceys  was  taken  for  the  death  of 
Robert  son  of  Goldina,  and  the  serjeant  of  the  Abbot  of 
Glaston*  received  him  when  taken.*  Afterwards  he  [Richard] 
was  captured,  and  he  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon 
the  country.  Therefore  the  sheriff  of  Somerset  is  ordered  that 
he  should  convene  the  four  neighbouring  hundreds  in  full  county 
[court]  before  him,  and  Jordan  Oliver,  John  de  Reyny,  and 
Ralph  de  Lidiard*,  and  by  their  oaths  diligently  make  inquest, 
etc.,  and  according  to  such  inquisition  do  give  judgment. 

248.  Hugh  Brockere,  Richard  Lolling,  Alan  son  of  Thurkill', 
accused  of  the  aforesaid  death,  did  not  come.^  And  twelve 
jurors  of  Kymaresdun',  where  the  deed  was  done,  say  positively 
that  Robert  was  killed,  and  that  all  are  guilty  of  that  death,  and 
they  have  fled.  Let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  They 
were  in  the  tithing  of  Aswike.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

249.  Robert  le  Batur  of  Batecumb',  accused  of  theft,  fled. 
He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Let  him  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  He  abode  in  the  vill  of  Batecumb'  without  frank- 
pledge.    Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.     He  had  no  chattels. 

250.  Eustace  de  Durevill',  accused  of  burglary  and  other 
misdeeds,  was  taken,  and  put  in  prison  at  Ivelcestr'.  He  broke 
gaol*  and  fled  to  the  monastery  and  abjured  the  realm.  He 
had  no  chattels. 

251.  Thomas  Beiniy  and  Godfrey  Waspail',  accused  of 
burglary,  come  and  are  not  suspected.  Therefore  let  them  be 
liberated. 

*  There  is  a  marginal  note  here  that  "this  must  be  discussed."  The  rest  of  the 
enir)'  would  appear  from  the  handwriting  to  have  been  added  later,  probably  after  the 
hundredors  had  left.  Prof.  Maitland  suggests  this  ("  Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown,"  Seld. 
Soc.,  p.  119).     See  No.  173  for  another  case  of  inquest. 

*  There  is  a  marginal  note  to  the  effect  that  this  also  must  be  discussed  and  the 
accused  be  referred  to  Kymaresdun'. 

*  Sec  No.  115  note,  and  many  other  cases  in  this  roll.  The  gaol  at  Ilchester 
seems  to  have  been  repeatedly  broken. 


S6  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


The  Hundred  of  Catthesasse. 

252.  Thomas  the  hayward,  accused  of  robbery,  comes  and 
IS  not  suspected.     Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 

253.  Hugh  de  Patele  and  Nigel  his  son,  accused  of  theft, 
come  and  defend  the  whole,  and  put  themselves  upon  the 
country.* 

254.  Peter  son  of  Robert  de  Grave,  accused  of  theft,  comes 
and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.* 

255.  Roger  le  Gelus,  taken  for  the  death  of  Geoffry  Golde, 
comes  and  defends  the  whole.  And  it  is  not  known  whether 
he  killed  the  dead  man  or  not,  because  it  is  not  known  in  what 
way  it  happened,  and  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good 
and  ill.  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  townships  of  Abbot's 
Cammel,  Barewe,  Stipelkari,  and  Sparkeford'  say  that  Hugh  de 
Patele  and  Nigel  his  son  (see  No.  253)  are  thieves.  Therefore 
let  them  be  hanged.  Concerning  Peter  (see  No.  254)  and  Roger 
le  Gelus,  they  say  that  they  are  not  guilty.  Therefore  let  them 
be  liberated. 

256.  Henry  le  Teinguus  killed  Wilkin  le  Vilur  and  fled.  He 
was  an  itinerant  groom  (garcio  itinerans\  and  he  is  suspected  of 
that  death.     Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

257.  Nicholas  le  Franceis  of  Berton',  accused  of  theft,  fled. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Berton*.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels.* 

Memb.  4. 

The  Hundred  of  Sutperton'.* 

258.  Walter  Wakewel  was  taken  for  robbery  and  imprisoned 
at  Ivelecestr'.  He  broke  gaol  and  escaped.  Therefore  let  him 
be  treated  as  if  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

259.  Richard  de  Bamevill',  suspected  of  theft,  fled.  He  was 
a  free  man  and  a  vagrant  {iiinerans).  He  is  suspected.  Let  him 
be  exacted  and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

1  See  No.  255  for  the  result. 

'  No  inquiry  as  to  his  chattels  is  expressly  directed.    Nevertheless,  such  was  made 
(see  Nos.  384,  385. )     Probably  on  later  information  it  was  ordered. 
'  South  Pctherton. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  57 


260.  Walter  Black  killed  Adam  de  la  More  and  fled.  He 
was  a  free  man  and  a  vagrant.  He  was  sued  for  that  death  by 
Radinda,  [Adam's]  wife,  in  four  county  [courts]  and  outlawed. 
Therefore  let  him  be  treated  as  an  outlaw.  His  chattels  [were 
worth]  isj.  4i/.     [He  had]  a  rent  of  i  is. 

261.  Thomas  le  Ware  of  Stanton  killed  Christiana  de  Stan- 
ton and  fled.  He  was  a  vagrant,  and  therefore  without  frank- 
pledge. He  had  no  chattels.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed. 

The  Hundred  of  Sumerton'. 

262.  Henry  the  miller  of  BoimuFn  (?),  attached  upon  an 
accusation  of  harbouring  thieves,  comes  and  is  not  suspected. 
Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 

263.  Simon  de  Kingesdon'  killed  Boeis  de  Kingsdon*  and 
fled  to  the  monastery,  confessed  the  death,  and  abjured  the 
realm. 

The  Burgh  of  Lamport'. 

264.  Knows  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Mertok. 

265.  Walter  Bule  of  Kote  killed  his  wife  and  was  taken  and 
died  in  prison.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  2J.,  for  which  Peter  de 
Mallo  must  answer. 

266.  Adam  Leveies  and  Richard  his  son,  accused  of  theft, 
have  fled.  They  are  suspected.  Let  them  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  They  were  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Esse.  There- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.     Let  inquiry  be  made  as  to  their  chattels. 

267.  Osbert  Cath',  accused  of  theft,  comes  and  defends  the 
whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  And  Anketil'  de 
Scompeton*,  Adam  Laure,  Geoflry  Maidens,  Reginald  Kipping, 
Osbert  Cole,  and  Walter  Glide,  accused  of  thefts  and  of  har- 
bouring thieves,  come  and  defend  the  whole,  and  put  themselves 
upon  the  country.  The  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  townships  of 
Stapleton',  Cotes,  Hanton  Mertoc,*  and  Esse  say  that  all  are 
lawful  men.     Therefore  let  them  be  liberated. 

*  The  addition  of  Mertoc  distinguishes  this  Hanton  (now  Henion)  from  Ilinton 
St  Geogre  and  Hinton  Cbarterbou^e. 

I 


58  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


The  Hundred  of  WithelegV 

268.  Godfrey  Cath'  of  Holeford,  suspected  of  harbouring 
thieves,  fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Holeford ; 
therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.     [He  had]  no  chattels. 

269.  Robert  Tropinel,  suspected  of  theft,  comes  and  defends 
the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill. 
And  twelve  jurors  and  four  townships  say  positively  that  he  is  a 
lawful  man.     Therefore  let  him  be  liberated. 

270.  Richard  RufF  of  Budukeleg',*  accused  of  theft,  fled.  He 
was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Buthukeleg*.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  many  thefts.  Let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.     He  had  no  chattels. 

271.  William  Pipemhit  killed  William  Romo  and  fled.  He 
was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Chanton'.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Let  him  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  32^.,  for  which  the  sheriff" 
must  answer. 

272.  Richard  de  Brente  son  of  Adam  Thurbem',  accused  of 
theft,  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country.  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  townships  of  Brente, 
Suthbrente,  Linpelesham,  and  Bumeham  say  that  they  do  not 
suspect  him  except  concerning  a  colt  {de  uno  pullo)  which  he 
took  in  madness  at  a  time  when  he  was  lunatic.  Therefore  let 
him  be  under  pledges  until  more  shall  be  known. 

The  Hundred  of  Kinemeredun'.* 

273.  Henry  de  Rugehide  killed  Reginald,  the  man  of  Henry 
de  Curtenay,  and  fled.  He  was  not  in  tithing,  because  he  passed 
himself  off"  as  an  itinerant  clerk  {quia  fecit  se  ciericum  itiner- 
antem).  He  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed. 

274.  Stephen  Clay  of  Emigton',*  John  his  son,  and  Geoffry  le 
Burser',  accused  of  robber}'  and  burglary,  come  and  defend  the 
whole,  and  put  themselves  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill. 
And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  townships  of  *Boclande,  Hard- 
ington\  Wateleg*,  and  Melles*  say  that  they  do  not  suspect  them. 
Therefore  let  them  be  liberated. 

'  Wliitley.  '  Bmleigh.  •  Rilinersdon. 

*  Hemington.  '^  Buckbnd  Denham,  HardingtoD,  Whatlcy,  and  Mclls. 


somersetshire  pleas.  59 

The  Hundred  of  Bedministre. 

275.  Joceus  the  carpenter  killed  his  wife  and  fled.  He  was 
in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Bedministre  ;  therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Let  him  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  4^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

276.  David  son  of  Geoffry,  accused  of  burglary  in  the  house 
of  Matilda  de  Heidun',  was  taken  and  put  in  the  prison  of 
the  Abbot  of  Glaston'  at  Melnes.  He  escaped  from  prison  ; 
therefore  to  judgment  for  the  escape.  It  is  testified  by  all  the 
jurors  that  David  caused  burglars  to  enter  the  house,  to  wit, 
Geoffry  the  harper  and  John  Levething',  who  are  elsewhere 
suspected/  and  the  steward  of  the  Abbot  is  present  and  admits 
the  escape,  and  says  that  Peter  de  Mallo  took  lOOs,  for  it. 
Therefore  that  must  be  inquired  into.  Let  David  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  Peter  must  restore  [the  loor.]  to  our  lord  the 
King. 

277.  Adam  le  Flogerare  was  accused  of  injuring  (de  brusurdf 
the  house  of  Hugh  the  fuller.  He  is  suspected.  Let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  He  had  no  chattels,  and  he  was  in  the 
tithing  of  the  vill  of  Melles,     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

Memb.  4//. 

The  Hundred  of  Stakes.^ 

278.  Philip  de  Spallers,  suspected  oftheft,  comes  and  defends 
the  whole,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  And  twelve 
jurors  and  the  four  townships  of  *Estington',  Givele,  Mudford, 
and  Merse*  say  positively  that  they  rather  believe  him  to  be  a 
thief  than  a  lawful  man,  and  they  show  sufficient  reasons. 
[Therefore  to  judgment^]  He  has  been  hanged.  Inquire  as  to 
his  chattels.     He  had  land  and  chattels. 

279.  Robert  the  Irishman,  suspected  oftheft,  fled.  He  was  a 
wanderer,  and  therefore  not  in  tithing.  Let  him  be  exacted  and 
outlawed. 

*  In  the  Hundred  of  Froroe  :  see  No.  213.  The  culprits  were  a  band  of  itinerant 
minstrels,  who  seem  to  have  combined  burglary  with  their  ostensible  occupation. 
Peter  de  Mallo  was  the  sheriff. 

*  See  note  to  No.  243.  ^  Stone. 
"*~^  Ashington,  Yeovil,  Mudford,  and  Marsh. 

*  Marginal  note.     The  rest  of  the  entry  was  made  later. 


60  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

280.  Roland  and  Randal,  sons  of  Roland  Avenel,  killed 
Sybil,  the  Norman  woman,  in  the  house  of  Nicholas  Avenel. 
They  had  come  from  Normandy,  and  they  forthwith  fled  thither. 
No  other  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Let  them  be  exacted  and 
outlawed. 

281.  Hugh  Swere  killed  Richard  son  of  Yerild,  and  fled. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Edelestan*.  Therefore  it  is 
in  mercy.  No  other  is  suspected.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed.    His  chattels  [were  worth]  dr.  4//. 

282.  Mabel  daughter  of  Deru'in'  was  playing  with  a  certain 
stone  in  Givele,*  and  the  stone  fell  on  the  head  of  Walter  Critele, 
but  he  suflered  no  harm  by  the  blow.  He  died  afterwards 
within  a  month  from  sickness,  and  she  in  fear  fled  to  the  church. 
[The  jurors]  say  positively  that  [Walter]  did  not  die  from  that 
blow.  Therefore  let  her  be  in  custody  until  the  King  be  con- 
sulted. [Her  pledges  are]  William  Derwin',  Henry  Derwin', 
Richard  de  Stana,  Nicholas  Derwin,  Hugh  Den^'in*,  Ed%i-ard  the 
cobbler,  Norman  son  of  Paie,  and  Herbert  son  of  Richard. 

The  Hundred  of  Dulverton'. 

283.  Knou*s  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Wrington. 

284.  Gilbert  de  Benre  was  found  killed  in  the  vi^ter  at 
Wrington,  and  William  Russel,  then  beadle,  was  taken  for  that 
death  and  imprisoned  at  Glaston*.  Therefore  to  judgment  for 
the  e\-asion.^  And  twelve  jurors  suspect  him  of  that  death. 
Therefore  let  htm  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

The  Hundred  of  Bruneland*. 

285.  William  son  of  Harding  de  Finecumb'  killed  Richard 
Blund  of  Lidiard*  and  fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  the  \ill 
of  Exeton*.  Therefore  it  is  in  merc}\  He  is  suspected  of  that 
death.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  outla\K^.  His  chatteb  [«-ere 
worth]  4^.  5</. 


•  Vcoril. 

*  Obriooilf  he  escaped  iroai  psisciu  *lib«^  it  ts  noC  so  stmied. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  6 1 


Memb.  5. 

286.  Joice  de  Baiocis  in  mercy  for  default. 

287.  EHas  Beket  in  mercy  for  default. 

288.  Drogo  de  (Stretton  erased)  Stanton  in  mercy  for 
default 

289.  William  Maureward  and  Luke  de  Barri  in  mercy  for 
default.  (Two  other  names  were  included  in  this  entry — Henry 
de  Bikesande  and  Andrew  the  smith — but  they  are  struck  out, 
with  the  addition  of  a  note — "  venit " — in  each  case.) 

290.  John  de  Cinnoc  in  mercy  for  default.  Jordan  Blundel 
in  mercy  for  the  same,  and  likewise  Robert  Chanu  and  Thomas 
de  Mariscis. 

291.  William  de  Kemelecumbe  {struck  out)  in  mercy  for 
default  (A  note  is  added  that  he  is  essoined  and  has  a  day 
given  him.) 

Pleas  of  Assize. 

292.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  J.  the  Bishop 
of  Bath,  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Henry  de 
Ortiaco  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Westour*  which  apper- 
tains to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill,  since  the  last, 
etc.  Afterwards  Henry  comes  and  retracts  and  does  not  wish 
to  proceed.  Therefore  the  Bishop  [goes]  without  a  day,  and 
Henry  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit  Robert  the  cook 
{cocus)  and  Robert  de  Dilinton',  are  in  mercy. 

293.  The  sheriff  was  enjoined  that  he  should  cause  to  be 
recorded*  in  his  county  [court]  the  suit  which  was  in  the  same 
county  [court]  between  William  Maltravers,  claimant,  and 
John  Maltravers,  tenant,  of  one  Knight's  fee  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  Givle,*  wherein  the  aforesaid  John  complained  that 
a  false  judgment  was  done  to  him  in  the  same  county  [court]  ; 
and  the  sheriff  of  Somerset  was  further  enjoined  that  he  should 
cause  such  record  to  be  made,  and  that  he  should  have  it  before 

*  The  county  court  did  not  keep  a  record  in  writing  of  its  proceedings.  When  a 
matter  was  removed  thence  to  a  superior  court  on  a  writ  of  false  judgment,  the  pro- 
ceedings in  the  county  court  were  ordered  to  be  recorded.  This  was  done  by  re- 
capitulating the  proceedings  in  the  county  court,  in  the  presence,  amongst  others,  of 
the  knights  whose  duty  it  was  to  bear  record  at  Westminster.  Perhaps  the  record  so 
made  was  written  ;  but,  written  or  not,  the  sutement  by  the  knights  of  what  had  taken 
place  in  the  county  court  bound  the  county.  '^  Veovil. 


62  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

the  justices  at  Westminster  upon  the  complaint  of  John.  And 
the  suit  remained  without  a  day  by  reason  of  the  death  of  John, 
and  [the  sheriff  was  instructed]  that  he  should  have  the  record 
before  the  justices  at  Westminster  on  the  octave  of  Michaelmas  by 
four,^  etc.,  and  that  William  be  summoned  to  hear  the  record,  and 
to  reply  thereto.  And  upon  this,  our  lord  the  King  commanded 
that  the  justices  assigned  to  take  assizes  of  novel  disseisin  and 
to  make  gaol  delivery  should  hear  that  record  in  the  condition 
in  which  it  was  summoned  to  Westminster.  And  William  does 
not  come,  and  the  whole  county  records  that  it  directly  dis- 
putes that  judgment  by  which  the  same  William  recovered 
seisin  of  the  aforesaid  land  against  the  same  John.  But  they 
[the  knights]  wish  to  tell  the  truth,  that  William  bore  the  King  s 
writ  of  right  against  John  of  the  same  land.  And  at  length, 
after  essoins  and  view  sought  of  the  land,  and  after  many 
delays,  the  same  John  appeared  in  full  county  [court]  and 
answered  that  William  had  no  right  in  the  land,  because  a  fine 
concerning  the  same  land  was  made  in  the  court  of  John,  Count 
of  Moreton','  who  afterwards  was  King  of  England,  and  he 
produced  the  chirograph  made  between  Walter  Maltravers, 
John's  eldest  brother,  and  John  Maltravers,  father  of  Walter  and 
John,  by  which  chirograph  the  land  ought  to  remain  to  John 
the  son.  And  William  replied  to  the  chirograph  that  it  ought 
not  to  hurt  him,  because  it  was  not  made  in  the  King's  court. 
And  Roger  de  Forde,  then  sheriff,  supported  William,  because 
he  was  yeoman  {ifalettus)  to  Peter  de  Malo  Lacu,  his  lord,  and 
was  wishful  that  the  county  court  should  give  judgment 
that  William  should  have  his  seisin,  and  the  county  [court] 
wished  to  do  nothing  in  the  matter,  and  withdrew,  except  two 
or  three  who  remained  until  the  hour  of  vespers.  So  that  at 
last  Roger  said  to  them  that  remained  that  they  should  fear- 
lessly make  judgment,  and  that  he  would  warrant  them  in  this. 
And  when  John  heard  this,  suspecting  that  injury  would  be 
done  him  by  Roger  the  sheriff,  he  replied  that  as  the  chirograph 
could  not  support  him,  he  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize  of 
our  lord  the  King,  and  claimed  a  recognition  whether  he  had 
the   greater   right   in    the  land  or   William.      And   Roger  the 

*  i.e.  by  four  knights,  who  were  present  at  the  making  of  the  record,  and  who 
were  ordered  by  the  sheriff  to  attend  the  superior  court.  Sec  Glan.,  lib.  viij,  c,  9 
and  10.  *  Mortain. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  63 

sheriff  answered  that  this  ought  not  to  help  him,  nor  should 
there  be  an  assize  between  them,  because  he  [John]  first  willed 
to  defend  himself  by  the  chirograph,  which  ought  not  to  support 
him,  and  therefore  he  could  not  have  any  other  answer.  And 
for  this  reason  Roger,  and  the  two  or  three  who  were  with  him, 
adjudged  to  William  his  seisin  without  the  assent  or  will  of  the 
county  [court],  and  that  in  no  other  way  had  [William]  seisin. 
This  [the  county]  offers  to  prove,  as  the  court  shall  consider. 
To  judgment.^  A  day  is  given  them  to  hear  judgment  on 
the  octave  of  Michaelmas  at  Westminster.  William  essoins 
himself. 

294.  The  assizes  of  novel  disseisin  which  William  de  Eston' 
and  Cicely  la  Butyllere  have  arraigned  against  Maurice  de 
Gant  concerning  pastures  in  Wolvvardeston  and  Wildemareis 
are  postponed  until  the  first  month  after  Michaelmas  at  West- 
minster by  writ*  of  our  lord  the  King,  because  Maurice  is  in  the 
service  of  our  lord  the  King  in  Wales.  And  Cicely  puts  in 
her  place  Ralph  de  Wolhaumton,  or  Nicholas  son  of  Gilbert. 
The  same  day  is  given  to  all  the  recognitors. 

295.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Horsi  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  William  de 
Raleg'  of  his  free  tenement  in  Dunwarc  after  the  last,  etc.  And 
William  de  Horsy  comes  and  confesses  the  disseisin,  to  wit,  of 
five  acres  and  a  half  of  meadow.  Therefore  let  William  dc 
Raleg'  have  his  seisin,  and  William  de  Horsi  is  in  mercy. 

296.  Pardon  of  damages  for  William  Briwerr*. 

297.  The  matter  of  the  scotale  is  to  be  discussed  in  which 
the  county  complains  that  the  archdeacons  and  deans  implead 
in  court  christian  all  who  go  to  a  scotale,  and  there  do  harass 
them. 

298.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert,  son  of 
David  the  priest,  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised 
Cicely,  daughter  of  Osbert,  of  her  free  tenement  in  Bath  since 
the  last  [crossing  of  the  King  into  Normandy].  And  Robert's 
bailiff  comes  and  says  that  he  ought  not  [to  be  required]  to 
answer  her  in  the  absence  of  her  husband,  and  he  craved  judg- 
ment, inasmuch  as  she  has  a  husband  ;  and  the  writ  does  not 
speak  of  her  husband,  although  she  was  married  to  the  .same 
husband  on  the  day  when  the  writ  was  obtained.     And  Cicely 

'  In  the  maigin. 

^  This  viit  will  be  fband  in  Rot.  Class.,  toL  2,  p.  79. 


(>4  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


i^M1fcsscs  this.  Therefore  Robert  is  quit,  and  she  is  in  mercy. 
She  Atui  her  husband  may  seek  [a  uTit]  if  they  ^ish. 

,>>x  The  assi«^  cx>mes  to  re<x^jnise  whether  John  de  Audeh', 
Kichaai  Moun,  Adam  Pnice,  WiUiam  S«-ete,  Adam  Herte, 
Adam  Sauvai:x>,  Turj^isius,  Richard  de  Morleg\  Adam  Gydi,  and 
RicharvJ  Snel  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  William 
vlo  V^uorvndon  and  A<:^atha  his  wnfe  of  their  free  tenement  in 
Stv^kt'  itunncr  since  the  last  [crossing  of  the  King  into  Nor- 
n^aiuly].  And  it  is  testified  that  the  same  John  .  .  .  and 
that  all  the  others  do  not  hold  that  tenement  in  demesne,  be- 
cause thcv  anc  K>hn  s  men,  and  hi>Id  it  of  him  at  his  will  There- 
fvMV  the  assi^  remains,  ai'hl  WiUiam  and  Agatha  may  seek  [a 
xxnt  it  they  wish). 

>X\  I'W  ass;^<^  cv>mes  to  nc%x^xse  whether  the  Prior  of  Bath 
;;r«;ust4y  atvi  \\ithix:t  jxKi^>ent  <i^:s«3sed  Harding  de  Wetbcr- 
Vn:^'  ^M  his  tw  tcnc«>cn:  :n  Cumptcw  since  tbe  lasi  ^crc36Ki^ 
^'«  tV  Kir^l  A:vi  the  lV:v>r  cociies  and  tally  ccooedes  [that] 
t>sc  a:s<i«^  i^^'^y  p^vt^.V  SccAu?3e  he  siys  thu  ^Harinxg]  is  a 
\-  j>e::x  arKi  nvccowr  s;:rTrrj3cre».i  to  Ae  Pnor  rn  tuL  ooort  the 
tcr*er:>erit  he  c^iaitns.  The  -^^rvX^  >aLv  thai  Thociafw.  Prirc  of  Bath 
•x-A<-r  x*,T«5i3^T><vi  Tianir^"  oc  mhit  he  cla^rrrs.  nor  was  KAen,^ 
\hS.>5    xsf  v^J5sroc:\     the   PrKXs"   tT«6cc«sscr,   ere 


TScT^fv^rc  Thv'^cvJts  -now  }V>cr.  may  ^.-^  qc^  Hgr.-rng  i?  in 
TTKTCX'.     He  js  a  rvfeiir^r. 

5U":    The   Jtssirc  v^^^r>cs  r^  r^^,-^r^K?5e  w^Kther  tie    Prinr  ci 

y^i\  4i*  ij<)\  ar>^  m-irKto:   aocJ^nimv  jonct'  ihe  iafC  ]^zr.-ssinr;  nc 

••cv  r^^^mc^:  \t  rYc  sjirr^r  vH.  Atvt.  ^ir  ?^nr  r-nms  znz  iinHr 
o.*^*v"0'."v^  chj^:' tSr  ;^^.7^  rroL^  n*,xx^."'l  Tik:  turrrs  srr  tiia:  tie 
."^-o^^*^:  Ti^.v  .:v  /i>5sr:sr  AlrvitJvn^^  urjihcV  a5  iii;  vtc  sets. 
Nvft4>c  ,    '  ^h;^:   -,\rviirwtr-s  m.irhcT  «'h.-  hf!i::  "Hia:  i2ni^ 

rrv^n;  Vifi-  tT»n-c  X%;i-c<  r*-  rh;^:  r»fccxr^  that  iTxr  Trin-  n^rminrf 

*-      -  ,>  rrax^^r  ^»^rr.fr»"\r  ?>    n:    v-;5>  a:*^'u>cnmrr   i:    T^vz,  ani  Tut 


K  * 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  65 

Prior  is  in  mercy  for  the  disseisin.    Damages,  20s.   The  damages 
are  pardoned. 

302.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Ralph  de 
Soliny/  Hugh  de  Gundevill',  Ralph  de  Dovill,  and  John  de 
Tracy  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Geoffry  de 
Sullynye  of  his  free  tenement  in  Kynemerdon*  since  the  last 
[crossing  of  the  King,  etc.].  And  Ralph  comes  and  says  that  he 
claims  nothing  in  the  land  except  by  delivery  (de  ballia)  of 
our  lord  the  King,  and  of  which  [land]  he  says  he  was  put  in 
seisin  by  the  King's  writ  And  the  bailiff  of  our  lord  the  King, 
who  .  .  .  put  him  in  seisin,  is  here  and  testifies  this.  And 
Geoffry  comes  and  confesses  that  he  was  present  when  our  lord 
the  King  granted  that  tenement  to  Ralph,  and  he  says  positively 
that  Hasculf  de  Suliny,  their  father,  who  adopted  the  cross 
(crusignatus)  before  he  started  for  the  Holy  Land,*  by  a  certain 
privilege  of  those  who  had  taken  the  Cross,  granted  his  land  to 
a  certain  farmer  to  hold  for  three  years  after  his  [Hasculf  s]  death. 
And  then  came  Geoffry,  and  so  managed  that  the  same  farmer 
demised  to  him  the  term.  So  it  is  considered  that  Ralph  should 
go  quit,  and  that  Geoffry  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.  Hugh 
and  the  others  did  not  come.  They  were  not  attached  because 
they  were  not  to  be  found. 

303.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Smalfis 
and  Matilda  his  wife  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised 
Margery  Bosher  of  her  free  tenement  in  Twyuerton'  since  the 
last  [crossing  of  the  King,  etc.]  And  William  comes  and  says 
that  the  tenement  is  the  marriage  portion  of  his  wife.  After- 
wards he  comes  and  says  that  formerly  he  impleaded  Herbert 
Boscher  by  writ  of  right,  and  recovered  the  land  back  from  him, 
and  that  he  never  disseised  her.  He  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize,  and  Margery  does  likewise.  Therefore  let  the  assize 
proceed.  The  jurors  say  that  William  and  Matilda  unjustly 
disseised  [Margery]  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  let  her  have  her 
seisin,  and  William  is  in  mercy.  Damages,  2  marks.  Pledges 
for  the  damages,  John  Alleyn,  Robert  Artur,  John  de  Haub 

.    .     ,  Herbert  de  Cruces.     The  amercement  is  pardoned. 


'  5)oligny. 

'  The  roU  has  "ferram  snam"  which  seems  to  be  clearly  a  clerical  error  for 
"Urram  sanciam" 

K 


66 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


304.* 

*Cattesesse . . . 

*Horethurne 

*Rruietone  ... 

*Norton*     ... 

*Frome 

*Kinemerdone 

*  Wei  ewes    ... 

*Keynesham 

♦Bathon'      ... 

*Chiuton 

*Hareclive,... 

Beminstr*,    ... 

Porbir'*       ... 

*Bemestane 

Hunespil     ... 

*Chiu, 

*Wintestoke, 

*Kingrebir*, 

Banewell,    ... 

*Japton, 

♦Welles,      ... 

*Kingesbir, 

♦Walinton', 

*Lidiard,     ... 

*Wivelescumbe' 

♦Sumertone 

*Kokre 

*Stane 

♦Tintehiir  ... 

*Hundeberwe 
♦Mertok 
*Cruke 
*Superton'  ... 


Memb,  $d. 

Robert  Fichet* 
Ralph  de  Watevill*.* 
Geoffry  Blundus.* 
Hugh  Russeir.* 
Robert  le  Noreis.* 
Elias  de  Meles.* 
William  de  Litletone.* 
John  Pudding.* 
Peter  de  Bathon'.* 
Stephen  de  Chititon.* 

William  Smalnis. 

John  de  Wedmore.* 
Sweting.* 


^Hugh  de  la  Berewe.* 


Estmund'.* 

Ralph  le  Albe.* 

Roger  le  Bere.* 

Reginald     le     Cunte*     {substituted   for 

William  Juvenis,  struck  out). 
William  Juvenis.* 
Walter  the  Miller.* 
William  de  Chaub  ge.* 
Roger  de  Chuvele,* 


'  In  the  absence  of  a  title  to  this  list,  I  can  only  conjecture  that  it  comprises  the 
names  of  the  Serjeants  or  bailifls. 

^  These  places  are  bracketed  together,  but  opposite  **Chiu"  is  written  the  name 
Thomas  de  Bonevill'. 

*  In  the  original  every  name  of  place  or  person  here  marked  by  an  asterisk  has  a 
dot  or  tick  of  the  pen  against  it. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


67 


William  de  Elvete.* 
Walter  de  Bradeweie.* 
Henry  Ingoulf.* 
Richard  de  Appelby.* 
Thomas  Tollepein.* 
Alvred  de  Cumbe.* 
William  le  Tort* 
Osbert  de  Kantok.* 
Roger  de  Withele.* 
William  Rok.* 
Roger  de  Munketon'.* 
John  the  reeve.* 
Walter  de  Burgund'.* 
Simon  the  hundredman.* 


William  Dossel. 


•Bulestan    ... 

*Abedike    ... 

*Northcuri  ... 

*Tantone    . . . 

•Milvertone 

•Dilvertone 

*Karanton*... 

•Widiton'    ... 

•Kaninton  ... 

*Andridesfeld 

•Norhtperiton* 

Curry  Revel 

♦Whitstan  ... 

♦Whiteleg'  ... 

*Wrinctone. 

*Brente. 

*Burgus  de  Ivecestr*. 

*Mileburne... 

♦Villa  de  Bathon'. 

*Langeport. 

*Taunton*. 

*Mons  Acutus. 

*Staweye. 

*Dunestore. 

*Villa  de  Milverton\ 

*  Peri  ton. 

•Cruke. 

*Wascet. 

Chefdelmunt. 

Criz. 

*Burgus  de  Bruges. 

*Burgus  de  Welles. 

*Burgus  de  Axebrig'. 

Let  William  de  Giremvill*  and  Richard  de  Cumbe  go  for  a 
fourth  part  of  the  county,  William  de  Bakelr'  and  John  de 
Reygny  for  another  fourth  part,  William  de  Draicot  and  Peter 
de  Pultidon  for  another  fourth  part,  and  Roger  de  Sancto  Laudo 

•   In  the  original  every  name  of  place  or  person  here  marked  with  an  asterisk  has  a 
dot  or  tick  of  the  pen  against  it. 


68  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

and  Walter  de  Tilly  for  another  fourth  part,  and  let  them  divide 
the  hundreds  between  them.^ 

Assizes  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  Anno  9  H.  III.* 

Memb,  6. 

305.  Ralph  le  Tort  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with 
Robert  son  of  William  concerning  a  plea  of  land.* 

306.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Daynel 
and  Alda,  who  was  the  wife  of  Fulk  Dainel,  unjustly  and  with- 
out judgment  disseised  Jordan  Ridel  of  his  free  tenement  in 
Kusinton  since  the  last  [crossing  of  the  King,  etc.].  And 
William  comes,  and  Alda's  attorney  comes,  and  they  fully 
concede  [that]  the  assize  [may  proceed].  Afterwards  Jordan 
comes  and  witfidraws  from  [the  claim],  and  therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit  William  de  Baketrepe  and  Nicholas 
de  Kruke,  are  in  mercy. 

307.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Abbot  of 
Bordel  unjustly  and  without  judgment,  since  the  [last  crossing  of 
the  King,  etc.],  disseised  Roger,  parson  of  the  church  of  Chiue- 
ton,  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Chiueton,  which  is  appurtenant 
to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill.  And  the  bailiff  of  the 
Abbot  comes  and  says  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should 
remain.  The  jurors  say  that  the  Abbot  unjustly  disseised  the 
same  Roger  as  the  writ  says,  because  he  included  about  three 
acres  within  a  ditch.  Therefore  Roger  recovered  his  seisin,  and 
the  Abbot  is  in  mercy.  The  damages  are  pardoned.  Concern- 
ing certain  great  cultures  which  anciently  were  closed,  whereof 
Roger  complained,  they  say  that  the  Abbot  of  Bordcle  might 
well  close  them  when  he  willed  without  contradiction  by  anyone 
and  without  right  of  common  which  any  one  might  [otherwise] 
have  while  they  should  be  closed.  But  when  the  cultures  be 
open  Roger  ought  to  have  common  thereon. 

^  This  entry  is  written  by  the  side  of  the  foregoing.  The  absence  of  explanation 
is  very  unfortunate.  I  have  seen  no  entry  quite  like  this  upon  any  roll.  The  nearest 
approach  to  resemblance  known  to  me  is  the  entry  of  the  names  of  the  chief  bailife 
01  Northumberland  in  40  Hen.  III.  See  "  NorUiumberland  Assize  Rolls,"  Surtees 
Soc.,  pp.  128  and  131. 

^  This  is  in  a  comparatively  modem  hand. 

'  This  fine  was  levied  on  the  morrow  of  the  Nativity  of  the  Virgin,  9  Hen.  HI.  It 
related  to  the  fourth  part  of  a  knight's  fes  in  '*  Binnewchi."  See  *'  Somerset  Fines" 
p.  48,  No.  69. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  69 

308.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Prior  of 
Bath  and  Swein  (Swanus)  son  of  Daunan,  unjustly  and  without 
judgment  disseised  Master  Alexander  de  Dorset  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Weston  since  the  last  [crossing  of  the  King,  etc.]. 
And  the  Prior  and  Swein  come  and  say  that  they  did  not 
disseise  him  after  that  time ;  therefore  let  the  assize  proceed. 
The  jurors  say  that  Thomas,  who  is  now  Prior,  and  of  whom 
complaint  is  made,  did  not  disseise  Alexander  of  the  services  of 
Swein,  as  was  complained,  after  the  time,  because  twenty  years 
sigone  Swein  made  his  service  to  the  Prior  of  Bath.  And  they 
say  positively  that  Swein  did  not  disseise  [Alexander]  of  any 
tenement  Therefore  they  may  go  quit,  and  Alexander  is  in 
mere)'. 

309.  The   assize  comes   to   recognise   whether  Richard    de 

Appelby  and  Denise  his  wife  unjustly  and  without  judgment 

disseised  Adam  son  of  Andrew  of  his  free  tenement  in  Stafford, 

since  the  last  [crossing  of  the  King,  etc.].     And  they  come  and 

fully  concede  [that]  the  assize  [may  proceed].     The  jurors  say 

that  the  same  Adam  at  one  time  sought  that  tenement  as  his 

right  against  John  de  la  Lude,  father  of  Robert  de  la  Ludc,  and 

John  then  gave  up  the  tenement  to  Adam  as  his  right,  and 

Adam  was  seised  thereof  as  his  free  tenement  until  Robert  de  la 

Lude,  son  of  the  aforesaid  John  who  had  died,  after  the  death 

of  his  father  and  together  with  Richard  and  Denise,  disseised 

him.     Next  Robert  himself  held  the  tenement  for  a  year,  and 

then   gave  it  by  charter  to  Richard  and   Denise.     Wherefore 

they  say  that  Robert,  who  has  died,  and  Richard  and   Denise 

disseised  him.     Therefore  let  Adam  have  his  seisin,  and  Richard 

and  Denise  are  in  mercy.     Damages,  32J.  6d.     Pledges  for  the 

amercement  and  damages,    Warin    de    la    Lude   and    William 

Wallensis. 

310.  The  Prior  of  Bath  puts  in  his  place  John  de  Thcrkesbir', 
or  William  de  Lingnire,  against  William  dc  Mariscis  on  a  plea 
of  assize  of  last  presentation,  etc.  And  William  is  present  and 
concedes  to  him  the  new  presentation,  saving  his  right. 

311.  Richard  Cotele  puts  in  his  place  William  de  Bonham 
against  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  Cotele,  upon  a  plea  of 
caption  of  a  fine,^  etc. 

312.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  de  Ken 


1  «< 


de  picaf  cyr  suiit^  etc.     Sec  Glanv.,  lib.  viij.,  c.  5. 


JO  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Herbert  de  Ken  of  his 
free  tenement  in  Clivedon*  since  the  last,  etc.  And  the  bailiff  of 
John  de  Ken  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be 
held,  because  the  tenement  remained  to  John  by  reason  of  a  fine,^ 
made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King  before  the  justices  in  eyre 
at  Ivecestr',  between  the  same  John  and  John  de  Cricheston', 
eldest  brother  of  the  aforesaid  Herbert,  by  which  fine  the  tene- 
ment remained  to  John  [de  Ken]  as  his  right,  so  that  neverthe- 
less that  John  de  Ckriches  should  hold  it  for  his  life,  and  after 
his  death  the  tenement  with  its  appurtenances  should  revert  to 
the  said  John  de  Ken  and  his  heirs  quit  of  him  [Johnde  C]  and 
his  heirs.  And,  moreover,  the  same  Herbert  conceded  that  he 
never  was  in  seisin  thereof  unless  by  intrusion.  Therefore  let 
the  assize  remain,  and  John  go  quit  thereof.  And  Herbert  is  in 
mercy. 

3 1 3.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert,  parson 
of  the  church  of  Cusinton',  unjustly  and  without  judgment 
raised  a  certain  dyke  in  Cusinton*  to  the  injury  of  the  free  tene- 
ment of  Jordan  Ridel  in  the  same  vill,  since  the  last,  etc.  And 
Robert  comes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  may  proceed. 
The  jurors  say  that  at  the  time  when  the  field  of  Cusinton* 
towards  the  west  lies  fallow  there  should  be  a  dyke  raised 
until  the  autumn  with  a  stile  (escalerd)  by  which  foot  passengers 
may  cross,  and  in  the  autumn  it  ought  to  be  levelled  so  that 
carts  and  people  on  horseback  may  pass,  and  now  [Robert]  does 
not  allow  it  to  be  levelled.  Wherefore  they  say  that  he  unjustly 
maintained  [the  dyke],  and  to  the  injury  of  [Jordan]  as  the  writ 
says.  Therefore  let  the  sheriff  cause  the  dyke  to  be  made  as 
it  ought  and  is  wont  to  be.  And  Robert  is  in  mercy.  The 
damages  are  pardoned. 

314.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Philip  de 
Sarumviir  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  William  le 
Waleis  of  his  free  tenement  in  Niweton'*  since  the  last,  etc.  And 
Philip  comes  and  says  that  he  did  not  unjustly  disseise  him,  but 
that  in  truth  William  of  his  own  free  will  gave  him  the  tenement 
for  100^.  of  land,  which  he  [Philip]  at  another  time  gave  him, 
and  [Philip]  puts  himself  upon  the  assize,  and  William  likewise. 
So  let  the  assize  proceed.      The  jurors  say  that  Philip  did  not 

^  The  fine  was  levied  on  Thursday  after  the  Purification,  3  Hen.  III.,  of  one  hide 
of  land   in  Clevedon.     An  abstract  is  to  be  found  in  "Somerset  Fines/'  .S. R.  Soc. 
p.  35.  -  Newton  Sermonville  near  Yeovil. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  7 1 

disseise  him  unjustly  as  the  writ  says,  but  that  it  is  true  as  it  is 
alleged  that  William  gave  him  the  tenement  for  loos.  of  land, 
which  [Philip]  gave  to  him,  which  tenement  William  before  held 
by  a  fine  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King  at  Geudeford'^ 
between  Robert  dc  Monasterio  and  Matilda  his  wife,  claimants, 
and  William  Wallensis  and  Emma  his  wife,  tenants,  of  one- 
third  part  of  the  vill  of  Waie  Newenton*  and  of  Sideliz  with  the 
appurtenances,  by  which  fine  that  third  part  enured  to  William. 
Therefore  Philip  may  go  quit,  and  William  is  in  mercy. 

315.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Alexander  de 
Lysewes  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  John  son  of 
Geoffry  of  his  free  tenement  in  Stokeling',  since  the  last,  etc. 
And  Alexander  does  not  come,  and  he  was  attached  by  Stephen 
de  Stafford*  and  John  de  Holecumbe.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy,  and  the  assize  is  taken  by  default.  Damages,  1  mark. 
The  sheriff  is  notified. 

316.  The  assize  of  mort  d'anccstor  comes  [to  recognise] 
whether  Agatha  daughter  of  Roger,  and  sister  of  William  son 
of  Roger,  was  seised  in  her  demesne  as  of  fee  of  one  hide  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Chestrebald'^  on  the  day  she 
died,  and  whether  she  died,  etc.,  and  whether  William  is  her 
next  heir.  And  Roger  le  Flemeng,  who  holds  the  land,  comes. 
And  William  comes  and  withdraws  himself.  Therefore  he  and 
his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit  John  de  Dultingecote  and 
Nicholas  Walklin  of  Sutton,  are  in  mercy.  And  be  it  known 
that  this  assize  was  summoned  by  special  instruction  of  our 
lord  the  King. 

317.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Alan  Basset  and 
Gilbert  Basset  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Matilda 
de  Say  of  her  free  tenement  in  Sutton  since  the  last,  etc.  And 
Gilbert  does  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Walter  de  Esseleg' 
and  Walter  de  la  Grave.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  And 
Alan  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  held, 
because  one  William  de  Monte  Acuto  held  the  tenement,  and 
upon  William's  death  he  [Alan]  took  it  into  his  hand,  inasmuch 
as  the  custody  of  it  belonged  to  him  by  reason  of  the  custody  of 
William  de  Monte  Acuto,  which  custody  he  has  during  infancy 
by  gift  of  the  King.  Further,  he  says  that  when  he  [Alan]  was 
in   the  service  of  our  lord   the   King  at    Bedford  {apud  Bed') 

^  Guildford.  '  Chesterblade. 


72  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

Matilda  intruded  herself  upon  that  tenement  Then  Alan,  by 
writ  of  our  lord  the  King,  [resumed  such  possession  as  he  had 
before  ?]^  And,  moreover,  if  Matilda  ought  to  have  it,  she  ought 
not  to  have  it  except  in  custody  .  .  .  ,  and  he  asks  judgment 
whether  such  custody  be  a  free  tenement.*  Matilda  comes 
and  confesses  that  she  claims  nothing  in  the  tenement  except  its 
custody.  Therefore  let  the  assize  remain,  and  Alan  go  quit 
thereof.  Matilda  is  in  mercy,  because  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
does  not  lie. 

3 1 8.  Drogo  de  Stanton*,  a  juror,  defends  all  summons,  and  the 
summoner  testifies  that  he  made  the  summons  {summonicio 
testata  est).  Therefore  let  him  [Drogo]  wage  his  law,  and  come 
with  his  law  to  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of  Michaelmas. 
His  pledges  of  law  are  Walter  Kemmy  and  Robert  de  Litleton*.* 

319.  Henry  Huse  is  in  mercy  for  his  transgression  because 
he  did  not  make  a  view  of  the  land  he  holds  of  another  than  the 
Bishop. 

320.  Hugh  de  Griniton  is  in  mercy  for  his  foolishness  {pro 
stulticia  sua)} 

Memb,  6d. 

321.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Bertram  de 
Garclippe  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  John  de 
Templo  of  his  free  tenement  in  Boclande  since  the  last,  etc. 
Bertram  is  in  Gascony  {est  Wasoii),  and  Geoffry  his  bailiff  does 
not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Nicholas  son  of  Denise,  and 
Thomas  de  Hache ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy,  and  the  assize 
is  taken  by  default.  The  jurors  say  that  one  Geoffry  Motun 
disseised  him  [John]  unjustly,  as  the  writ  says,  and  not  Bertram. 
Therefore  Bertram  is  quit  and  John  is  in  mercy.  The  amerce- 
ment is  pardoned  because  he  is  a  poor  chaplain. 

322.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Abbot  of 
Glaston'  and  Swein  de  Weston,  Hamo  the  clerk,  John  de 
Melnes,  and  William  de  Mere  unjustly  and  without  judgment 
disseised  William  de  Legh*  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Legh, 
which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill,  since 

^  The  entry  is  partly  illegible  here. 

-  The  entry  is  very  illegible  here,  but  I  think  this  is  the  sense.     Alan  pleads  a 
point  of  law,  and  his  plea  succeeds,     i^ee  Bract.,  fo.  167b. 
■'  The  whole  entry  seems  to  be  struck  out. 
^  QuiTre,  Was  this  a  case  of  '*  contempt  of  court "  ?    See  No.  467. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  73 


the  last,  etc  And  the  Abbot  comes  and  says  that  he  did  not 
disseise  him  of  any  pasture  in  Legh*,  and  William  is  not  able  to 
contradict  this.  Therefore  the  Abbot  and  the  rest  are  quit,  and 
William  is  in  mercy. 

323.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de  Fera- 
riis  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Hugh  de  Haleford' 
of  his  free  tenement  in  Brumlande  since  the  last,  etc.  And 
Robert's  bailiff  comes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may 
proceed].  The  jurors  say  that  Robert  disseised  him  unjustly  as 
the  writ  says,  to  wit  of  43  acres  of  arable  land,  from  which  he 
carried  off  the  crop,  and  of  other  land.  Therefore  let  Hugh 
have  his  seisin,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy.     Damages,  60s. 

324.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Malet 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  William  de  Ho  of  his 
free  tenement  in  Gelehampton  since  the  last,  etc.  And  William 
de  Ho  comes  and  withdraws  himself.  Therefore  he  and  his 
pledges,  to  wit  John  le  Hore  and  Gervase  de  Thore,  to  prosecute 
are  in  mercy. 

325.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Ralph  Huse 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Thomas  Corbet  of  his 
common  of  pasture  in  Cheriton*,  which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free 
tenement  in  the  same  vill,  since  the  last,  etc.  And  Ralph  comes 
and  says  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors 
say  that  he  did  disseise  [Thomas]  unjustly  as  the  writ  says. 
Therefore  let  Thomas  have  his  seisin,  and  Ralph  is  in  mercy. 
Damages,  2s,    The  sheriff  is  notified. 

326.  The  jury  comes  to  recognise  whether  a  messuage,  with 
its  appurtenances,  belongs  in  free  alms  to  the  church  of  Put- 
tenaya,  of  which  William  is  parson,  or  [whether  it  is]  the  lay 
fee  of  William  Ruffus,  who  comes  and  says  that  he  does  not  hold 
the  messuage  except  for  the  term  of  his  life  of  Henry  de  Ortiaco 
and  Sabina  his  wife,  and  he  vouches  Herbert  and  Sabina  to 
warranty.  Let  him  have  them  on  the  coming  of  the  justices 
[assigned  to  take]  all  pleas.^  And  the  sheriff  is  notified  that  he 
should  summon  them,  etc.,  and  Henry  de  Campo  Florido,  clerk. 
The  sheriff  has  the  writ. 

327.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  Corbet 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  raised  a  dyke  in  Chiritone  to 
the  injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Ralph  Huje  in  the  same  vill, 

'  The  present  justices  have  no  jurisdiction  to  try  this  action. 

L 


74  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

since  the  last,  etc.  And  Thomas  comes  and  says  that  he  has 
not  raised  any  dyke  unjustly,  and  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize,  and  Ralph  does  likewise.  Therefore  let  the  assize  proceed. 
The  jurors  say  that  one  Aylmer  Horn  held  the  tenement,  where 
the  dyke  was  raised,  of  Thomas  Hericun,  in  villeinage,  and  then 
Aylmer  raised  the  dyke  because  of  the  great  number  of  deer,^ 
lest  they  should  eat  the  crops  on  his  tenement,  and  at  length,  on 
account  of  the  great  number,  he  gave  up  the  tenement,  and  abode 
elsewhere.  And  a  long  while  afterwards  Thomas  came  and 
impleaded  Thomas  Hericum  and  recovered  [the  tenement]  against 
him,  and  then  he  raised  the  dyke  to  the  condition  in  which  it  was 
during  the  time  of  Aylmer.  Wherefore  they  say  that  [Thomas] 
did  not  raise  the  dyke  unjustly,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore 
Thomas  is  quit,  and  Ralph  is  in  mercy. 

328.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Philip  de 
Kareviir,  Stephen  de  Writhelington*,  Godfrey  son  of  Matilda, 
Robert  Melksop,  William  son  of  Aylwin,  William  son  ot 
Esquier,  and  Godstan  le  Savouer,  and  Christiana,  formerly 
the  wife  of  William  de  Kareviir,  unjustly  and  without  judg- 
ment disseised  Henry  son  of  William,  of  his  free  tenement  in 
Lokinton'  since  the  last,  eic.  And  they  come,  and  Christiana 
says  that  she  did  not  disseise  him,  but  that  in  truth  he  abode  in 
the  tenement  with  her,  at  her  will,  and  as  her  bailiff,  and  not  in 
any  other  way.  And  Henry  confesses  this.  Therefore  they  all 
are  quit.  Henry  is  a  pauper,  and  therefore  his  amercement  is 
pardoned. 

329.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de  Colum- 
bariis  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  the  Prior  of 
Briweton*  of  his  free  tenement  in  Lameth'*  and  Cumbe  since  the 
last,  etc.  And  Robert  comes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize 
[may  proceed].  The  jurors  say  that  Robert  did  disseise  him 
unjustly,  as  the  writ  says,  to  wit  of  a  certain  osier  bed  (de 
quodam  rifletd)  in  Lameht,  and  of  pasture  in  Cumbe.  Therefore 
let  the  Prior  have  his  seisin,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy.     Damages, 

330.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Philip  de  Enebaut 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Geoffry  de  Fumeir  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Libenesse  Whateleg'  and  in  Monhill  since 

'  '■^propter  maximum  exerciium  ferarum,*^    The  term /era  is  used  especially  for 
deer  :    Martin.  '  Lamyait. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  7$ 

the  last,  etc.  Philip  does  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Hugh 
de  Monte  and  Robert  de  Libenesse ;  therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  And  upon  this  comes  the  order  of  our  lord  the  King 
touching  the  putting  in  respite  before  the  justices  at  Westmin- 
ster, on  the  quindene  of  Michaelmas,  of  the  assize  of  novel 
disseisin,  which  Robert  de  Wancy  has  arraigned  before  M.  de 
Pateshull  and  his  associates,  justices  assigned,  etc.,  against  the 
same  Philip  contrary  to  the  liberties  which  W.  Marescall*, 
Earl  of  Pembroke,  has  by  charters  of  the  ancestors  of  our  lord 
the  King.  And  it  was  inquired  whether  any  other  assize  i^as 
arraigned  of  any  other  tenement  touching  the  franchise  of  the 
Earl.  It  was  said  that  the  aforesaid  assize  between  Geoflfry  and 
Philip  concerned  the  franchise  of  the  said  Earl.  And  afterwards 
it  was  said  that  Geoflry  had  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize 
of  our  lord  the  King  concerning  the  tenement  in  respect  of 
which  this  assize  is  arraigned,  so  that  he  ought  to  have  sought 
the  King's  writ  of  peace.  Therefore  let  this  assize  be  put  in 
respite  before  the  aforesaid  justices  at  Westminster,  at  the  time 
aforesaid,'  that  it  may  then  be  seen  from  the  rolls  of  the 
Chancery  whether  he  had  a  writ  of  peace,  and  that  it  may  like- 
wise be  learned  from  the  Earl  Marescall'  himself  in  what 
manner  the  assize  touched  upon  his  franchise.  And  Geoflry 
shall  then  have  his  judgment  it  the  assize  ought  not  to  proceed. 
In  the  meantime  let  the  assize  remain.  And  Geoff^ry  puts  in 
his  place  Alan,  or  William  de  Fumell. 

331.  The  assize  comes   to   recognise   whether   Agatha  de 
Middelton  and  Henry,  her  son,  unjustly  and  without  judgment 

^  The  record  of  the  proceedings  at  Westminster  is  to  be  found  in  Curia  Regis 
Roll,  No.  92,  Memb.  I2</.  Translated  it  runs  as  follows  : — **  The  a&size  conies  10 
recognise  whether  Philip  de  Enebaud  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Gcoffry  de  Fumcir  of 
his  tree  tenement  in  Libeness'  Whatelegh  and  in  Monbull  since  the  last,  etc.  Philip, 
by  his  attorney,  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  held,  because  he  has 
recovered  in  the  court  of  the  Earl  Marshall  by  judgment  of  the  court  upon  a  writ  of 
right  against  the  same  Geoffry,  for  Geoffry  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize  of  our 
lord  the  King,  and  did  rK>t  bring  his  writ  of^  peace.  He  vouched  that  court  [of  the 
Earl]  to  warranty.  Let  him  have  [the  court]  on  the  quindene  of  Hilary  by  aid  of 
[this]  court,  and  the  Earl  is  notified  that  this  must  be  discussed.''  The  dispute  was 
sabseqnently  settled,  and  on  Memb.  19  of  Curia  Regis  Roll,  No.  94,  is  the  record  of 
the  finr,  which  was  in  effect  that  Philip,  who  held,  recognised  the  whole  of  that  land  to 
be  the  right  of  Geoflfry,  and  restored  it  to  him,  ard  lor  ihis  (jeofTr)-  o\^ed  him  12  marks 
ard  a  half  to  be  paid  at  four  terms,  to  wit  at  the  Feast  of  St.  Michael  next  UAU  wing 
3  marks  and  20  pence,  at  Easter  next  following  3  marks  ami  20  pence,  at  the  Feast 
of  Sl  Michael  next  following  3  marks  and  20  pcLce,  and  at  Easier  ntxt  following 
3  mariuaod  ao  pence. 


76  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


have  diverted  the  course  of  a  certain  water  in  Middelton',  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Philip  de  Wikes  in  the  same  vill. 
Henry  has  died,  and  Agatha  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize 
[may  proceed],  and  says  nothing,  nor  does  she  accuse  anyone 
of  the  death  of  Henry.  The  jurors  say  that  Agatha  has  not 
unjustly  raised  any  dam  {stagninn)  to  the  prejudice  of  his  free 
tenement,  as  the  writ  says,  but  in  truth  she  made  the  dam 
broader  than  it  was,  and  it  is  not  to  the  injury  of  Philip,  nor  did 
she  encroach  in  any  way  on  his  land.  Therefore  she  is  quit, 
and  Philip  is  in  mercy. 

332.  William  le  Danes  puts  in.  his  place  Philip  de  Wike 
against  Agatha  de  Middelton'  on  a  plea  of  land,  and  against 
the  Abbot  of  Dunckewell'  on  a  plea  of  land,  etc.^ 

333.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Columbariis  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Aubert  de 
Lamyetta  and  Christiana  his  wife  of  his  common  of  pasture  in 
Lamyette  which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same 
vill,  since  the  last,  etc.  And  Robert  comes  and  says  that  he  did 
not  disseise  them,  for  in  truth  they  ought  to  have  in  the  pasture 
a  certain  number  of  beasts,  to  wit,  twelve  animals — six  oxen,  and 
as  many  cows — but  he  did  not  allow  them  to  have  more  beasts. 
And  Aubert  and  Christiana  say  that  they  are  entitled  to  have  in 
that  pasture  eight  oxen  and  six  cows  where  the  demesne  cattle 
of  Robert  feed,  and  he  does  not  allow  them  to  have  other  than 
six  oxen  and  as  many  cows  ;  and  moreover  he  cultivated  the 
good  pasture  and  put  their  cattle  in  worse  pasture,  and  they  put 
themselves  upon  the  assize,  and  Robert  does  likewise.  Therefore 
let  the  assize  proceed.  They  say  positively  that  in  this  year 
they  have  had  no  common  for  two  oxen.  The  jurors  say  that  he 
did  disseise  them  unjustly  as  the  writ  says,  because  they  have 
had  no  common  this  year  nor  in  the  preceding  year  for  the 
aforesaid  two  oxen,  and  [the  jurors]  say  positively  that  [Aubert 
and  Christiana]  ought  to  have  common  for  eight  oxen,  with  the 
demesne  oxen  of  Robert,  and  .  .  .  [six  ?]  cows  with  the 
demesne  cows  of  Robert,  and  wherever  he  is  accustomed  to  have 
common  on  the  land  of  Robert  .  .  .  ,  and  further  that  he 
cultivated  two  acres  and  a  half  of  that  pasture.  Therefore  let 
them  have  their  seisin,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy.  Damages,  \2d. 
The  sheriff  is  notified. 

^  There  is  a  marginal  note  here  "Devon'  Sumcrscl'." 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  7/ 


Memb.  7. 

334.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Walter  de  Forde 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Henry  de  Carevill*  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Briweton'  since  the  last,  etc.  And  Walter 
comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because 
Henry  was  not  in  seisin  of  the  land,  for  Henry  gave  that  land 
to  one  Henry  le  Archer  as  a  marriage  portion  with  his  daughter, 
and  Henry  le  Archer,  who  assumed  the  cross  {criice  signatus)^ 
before  he  set  out  on  his  journey  to  the  Holy  Land,  demised 
the  tenement  to  Roger  de  Forde,  father  of  Walter,  for  money 
which  he  gave  to  Henry  le  Archer  and  his  wife.  Roger  being 
dead,  Henry  de  Carevill'  intruded  upon  the  tenement,  and 
then  came  Walter,  and  ejected  him.  And  Henry  de  Carevill' 
confesses  this.    Therefore  he  is  in  mercy,  and  Walter  may  go  quit. 

335.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Peter  the  chaplain 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Ralph  de  Bloyo  and 
Isabella  his  wife  of  his  free  tenement  in  Boviir  since  the  last, 
etc.  And  Peter  comes  and  says  that  [Ralph]  has  no  tenement, 
cither  in  Bovyll*  or  in  the  district  where  that  vill  is.  And 
Ralph  confesses  this.  Therefore  Peter  is  quit,  and  Ralph  is  in 
mercy,  because  he  confesses  that  he  is  not  disseised  of  any 
tenement  in  such  vill. 

336.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  Wac  and 
John  Gubaud  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Richard 
son  of  John  of  his  free  tenement  in  Ichestoke*  since  the  last,  etc. 
They  do  not  come,  and  they  were  attached  by  Adam  the  reeve 
of  Ichestoke  and  Ranulf  of  the  churchyard  {de  cimiterio)  of 
Ichestoke.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy,  and  the  assize  is  taken 
in  default.  The  jurors  say  that  John  and  John  did  disseise  him 
of  his  free  tenement  unjustly,  as  the  writ  says,  because  they  saw 
Richard  seised  of  that  tenement  by  the  gift  of  John  Wac* 
Therefore  let  him  have  his  seisin,  and  John  and  John  are  in 
mercy.  They  have  nothing  in  the  county  upon  which  distress 
for  damages  may  be  made. 

*  Edstock  in  Cannington.  Ejrton,  however,  places  it  in  the  next  paifrh — Chilton 
Trinity — which  is  in  a  different  hundred.  See  the  Som.  Rec.  Society's  volume  of 
Kirkbys  Quest,  pp.  17,  143,  2gq,  333. 

*  Meaning,  no  doubt,  that  they  witnessed  the  ceremony  when  Richard  was  put  in 
seisin. 


78  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

337.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Adam  le  Waleis 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Gunulda  and  Hodiema, 
daughters  of  Ralph,  of  their  free  tenement  in  Langerig'  since 
the  last,  etc.  And  Adam  does  not  come,  and  he  was  attached 
by  Godfrey  Huse  and  William  the  reeve  of  Langerig'.  There- 
fore they  are  in  mercy,  and  the  assize  is  taken  in  default.  The 
jurors  say  that  he  did  not  disseise  them  unjustly  as  the  writ  says, 
because  they  were  never  in  seisin  of  that  tenement  after  the 
time  ;  but  in  truth  Walter  their  brother  held  it  for  ten  years, 
and  died  seised  thereof,  and  then  the  land  remained,  with  the 
sons  of  Walter,  in  their  custody.  But  a  long  while  ago  they 
were  resident  in  that  tenement  while  their  brother  was  m  parts 
beyond  the  seas,  and  when  he  returned  into  parts  on  this  side  of 
the  seas  Walter  held  the  tenement  as  of  his  right,  and  ejected 
his  sisters,  and  he  died  seised  as  aforesaid.  Therefore  Adam  is 
quit,  and  they  are  in  mercy.     They  are  paupers. 

338.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Roger  de 
Dodinton'  and  William  his  son  unjustly  and  without  judgment 
disseised  William  de  Exton  of  his  free  tenement  in  Dodington' 
since  the  last,  etc  And  Roger  is  ill,'  and  William  comes  and 
fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may  be  made].  The  juiors  say 
that  they  never  disseised  him  of  any  tenement  unjustly  as  the 
writ  says.  Therefore  they  are  quit,  and  William  de  Exton  is  in 
mercy.     [His]  pledge  for  the  amercement  [is]  Gilbert  de  Sipton. 

339.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Cumbe  and  Peter  de  Wabbecumbe  unjustly  and  without  judg- 
ment have  diverted  a  certain  watercourse  in  Elleworthe,  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Peter  de  Trukewell*  in  the  same 
vill  since  the  last,  etc.  And  Richard  and  Peter  de  Wabbecumbe 
come  and  say  nothing  why  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors 
say  that  Peter  and  not  Richard  diverted  that  watercourse  un- 
justly, and  to  the  prejudice  of  Peter  de  Trukewell*  as  the  writ 
says,  because  they  say  that  since  the  diversion  he  has  not  the 
watercourse  for  his  irrigation  as  much  as  he  had  before,  by 
reason  of  which  he  is  not  able  to  irrigate  his  sown  land.  There- 
fore let  the  sheriff  make  the  watercourse  as  it  ought  and  is  wont 
to  be.  And  Peter  de  Wabbecumbe  is  in  mercy,  and  likewise 
Peter  de  Trukeweir  is  in   mercy   for  his   false  claim  against 


^  *'  lan^idus  istf**  i.e.  confined  to  hu  bed  by  sickness,  or  infirmity. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  79 

HicharcL     Peter  de  Trukewell*s  pledge  is  Nicholas  de  Westouwe. 
^Damages,  4s. 

34a  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Ralph  Huse 
minjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Thomas  Corbet  of  his 
'firee  tenement  in  Cheriton  since  the  last,  etc.  And  Thomas 
<x>mes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may  be  made].  The 
jurors  say  that  Ralph  disseised  him  unjustly  as  the  writ  says,  to 
"wit  of  one  messuage  and  one  toft.  Therefore  let  Thomas  have 
liis  seisin,  and  Ralph  is  in  mercy.     Damages,  i^.  6d. 

341.  The  assize  comes  to  reco^^nise  whether  David  son  of 
William  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  William  Pilloc 
of  his  free  tenement  in  Stokeskurcy  since  the  last,  etc.  And 
David  comes  and  confesses  the  disseisin,  to  wit  of  one  messuage. 
Therefore  let  William  have  his  seisin,  and  David  is  in  mercy. 
He  is  a  pauper. 

342.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  de  Reyni, 
Ralph  Tortus,  and  Roger  de  Kingeston'  unjustly  and  without 
judgment  disseised  Robert  le  Bret  of  his  free  tenement  in 
Sanford'  since  the  last,  etc.  And  they  come  and  say  that  the 
assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because  John  le  Bret  died  seised  of 
tiiat  tenement,  and  then  Robert,  as  executor  of  the  will  of  him, 
John  le  Bret,  was  resident  on  that  land  until  he  should  complete 
execution  ;  and  moreover  they  say,  if  anyone  disseised  him,  it 
was  Henry  son  of  the  Earl,  who  held  the  custody  thereof  with 
the  [wardship  of  the]  heirs  of  John,  which  custody  Roger  de 
Kingesdon',  the  chief  lord  of  the  fee,  confirmed  to  him.  And 
they  say  positively  that  if  Robert  could  have  any  right  in  that 
land  he  released  the  same,  and  made  his  charter  of  quit  claim, 
which  they  show,  and  which  testifies  this.  And  Robert  comes 
and  says  that  John  did  not  die  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee, 
but  that  in  truth  he  died  seised  of  [Robert's]  service,  to  wit  of 
70tf.,  and  he  says  positively  that  he  [Robert]  was  seised  of  that 
tenement  a  long  while  before  the  death  of  John,  and  that  not 
John  de  Reyni,  but  the  others  named  in  the  writ,  disseised  him. 
And  he  says  that  the  charter  was  made  in  the  time  of  the  war 
[in  fear]*  of  death  .  .  .  ,  and  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize, 
and  John  and  the  others  do  likewise.  The  jurors  say  that  John 
le  Bret  died  seised  as  of  fee  of  that  tenement,  and  in  his 
demesne,  and  they  say  positively  that  never    .     .     .     that  John 

*  The  roll  is  partly  illegible  here,  but  this  wculd  seem  to  be  the  sense. 


8o  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

and  the  others  [never]  put  force  upon  him  to  make  that  charter. 
Therefore  John  and  the  others  are  quit,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy. 

343.  *  William  le  Bret  [gives]  10  marks  to  have  a  certain 
assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  against  Roger  de  Kal  .  .  .  and 
Agnes  his  wife  touching  land  in  the  county  of  Wilton.  His 
pledges  are  John  de  Campo  Florido  and  William  de  Mortin*. 

344.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Cobbeham,  Alexander  son  of  John,  and  Walter  le  Chamb'leng 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Cecily,  daughter  of 
Elias,  of  her  free  tenement  in  Weir  since  the  last,  etc.  And 
Richard  and  Alexander  do  not  come,  and  Walter  comes  and 
says  that  she  has  a  husband,  and  he  will  not  answer  without 
him,  unless  the  court  shall  consider  [otherwise].  This  she 
confesses.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  assize  should  not 
proceed. 

345.  The  assize  of  novel  disseisin  which  Berinwe  son  of 
Swift  arraigned  against  Walter  de  Dunheved  touching  a  tene- 
ment in     .     .     .     Worthie  remains,  because  Walter  is  dead. 

346.  Richard  Lunel,  who  has  arraigned  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  John  Russell  and  John  de  Boterell  concerning 
common  of  pasture  in  Horsinton',  came  and  withdrew  himself. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit  Robert  Fichet 
and  William  the  reeve  of  Cury,  are  in  mercy,  for  he  says  that  his 
writ  is  wrongly  procured,  because  he  claims  no  common  in 
Horsinton* ;  and  John  Russel  has  died,  without  whom  John  de 
Boterell  will  not  answer,  unless  the  court  should  consider  [tbat  he 
ought  to  do  so]. 

347.  William  le  Daneis  of  Middelton,  a  recognitor,  defends 
the  summons,  and  the  summons  is  testified.  Therefore  let  him 
wage  his  law  and  defend  his  [summons],  and  let  him  come  with 
his  law  to  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of  Michaelmas.  Pledges 
for  the  law,  Philip  and  Waleran  de  Webeleg'.* 

348.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  Titt- 
prest  unjustly  and  without  judgment  raised  a  certain  dyke  in 
King  ...  [to  the  injury  of  ?]  the  free  tenement  of  Ralph 
de  Toryny  in  the  same  vill  since  the  last,  etc  And  Richard 
comes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may  proceed].  The 
jurors  say  that  he  raised  a  certain  dyke  unjustly,  as  the  writ  says. 


i»  n 


»  Marginal  note  "  WUt' 

*  1  he  whole  of  this  entiy  is  struck  oat. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PI.EAS. 


8l 


and  to  the  injury  of  him  Ralph,  because  .  .  ,  the  dyke  was 
raised  there,  Thercrore  the  sheriff  should  restore  it  to  what  it 
ought  and  was  wont  to  be  Richard  is  in  mercy.  Damages,  lad. 
The  sheriff  is  notified. 

349.  Agatha  de  Middelton'  puts  in  her  place  Thomas  de 
Winton"  against  Philip  de  Wikc  on  a  plea  of  land. 

350.  Gundrcda  de  Alono  puts  in  her  place  Thomas  de 
Baneweli'  against  Geoffry  de  Alno  touching  the  taking  of  a 
chirograph  {de  cap  cyf). 

Mtmb.  yd. 

351.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de  la 
Hume,  Amicia  formerly  the  wife  of  Adam  de  Ponte,  Thomas 
dc  Bume,  and  Nicholas  son  of  Roger  the  cobbler,  unjustly 
and  without  judgment  disseised  Richard  de  Kane'  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Legh  since  the  last.  etc.  And  William  comes  and 
says  that  he  claims  nothing  in  the  land  except  for  a  term.  He 
saj-s  that  the  same  Richard  demised  the  tenement  to  the  afore- 
said Amicia,  whose  daughter  he  married,  for  the  term  of  four 
years,  and  Amicia  granted  her  term  to  him  [William].  And 
Richard  comes  and  says  that  he  never  demised  that  tenement 
for  a  term,  and  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize,  and  William  does 
likewise.  The  others  have  not  come,  and  they  were  not  at- 
tached. The  jurors  say  that  William  and  all  the  others  did 
disseise  [Richard]  unjustly  as  the  writ  says,  nor  do  they  know 
anything  of  the  term.  Let  Richard  have  his  sei.sin.  And 
William  is  in  mercy.  His  pledge  for  the  amercement  [is]  Philip 
de  la  Burne.     Damages,  lOt.     The  sheriff  is  notified. 

352.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Draicote  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Roger  Love! 
of  his  free  tenement  in  Redlis  since  the  last,  etc.  And  William 
comes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may  be  made].  The 
jurors  say  that  in  respect  of  a  certain  marl-pit  ijnarUra)  he  took 
possession  for  a  short  time  of  the  land  of  Roger,  and  that  as 
to  a  certain  quarry  \quarrera)  he  took  a  certain  part  without 
Roger's  licence,  and  carried  it  off  to  a  certain  place,  concerning 
which  complaint  was  made.  They  say  that  he  there  made  a 
pound  iparcum)  to  enclose  cattle,  and  that  he  did  not  disseise 
him  [as  to  this],  but  in  truth  he  made  the  pound  to  the  injury 
of  William,  and  to  the  obstruction  of  a  certain  way;  and  after 
consideration  by  jhe  hundred  [court]  it  was  broken  down.    There- 


82  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


fore  William  is  in  mercy  for  the  disseisin  in  respect  of  the  stone 
carried  off  and  the  land  occupied,  and  likewise  Roger  is  in  mercy 
for  his  false  claim  in  respect  of  the  place  where  the  pound  was. 
Let  the  sheriff  restore  the  marl-pit  and  the  quarry  as  they  ought 
to  be.     Damages,  2d, 

353-  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Nicholas 
Walkelin*,  Denise  formerly  the  wife  of  John  Maupudre,  Agnes 
formerly  the  wife  of  Walter  de  Cruke,  and  Robert  de  Sutton 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Richard  de  Othri  and 
Christiana  his  wife  of  his  free  tenement  in  Sutton'  since  the  last, 
etc.  And  Nicholas  comes,  and  the  others  come  and  say  nothing 
why  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors  say  that  one  Julia, 
mother  of  William  Seluein,  and  not  Nicholas  and  the  others 
named  in  the  writ,  disseised  them  unjustly  as  the  writ  [says]. 
And  they  say  positively  that  since  the  disseisin  she  held  the 
land  in  her  hand  for  four  years,  and  then  conveyed  the  land  to 
Nicholas  and  the  others.  Therefore  Richard  is  in  mercy,  and 
the  others  are  quit.  Richard's  pledge  for  the  amercement  is 
John  Seluein. 

354.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Agatha  and 
Elena  de  Bristol!',  daughters  of  Elias,  unjustly  and  without 
judgment  disseised  Geoffry  son  of  Oswald  of  his  free  tenement 
in  Norton'  since  the  last,  etc.  And  Agath'  and  Elena  have 
not  come,  nor  were  they  attached.  But  a  certain  one  comes  and 
produces  a  certain  charter  which  witnesses  that  the  same  Geoffry 
gave  and  granted  the  tenement  to  Elias  by  yearly  service.  And 
Geoffry  comes  and  confesses  that  in  truth  the  same  Elias,  before 
the  war,  disseised  him  of  the  same  tenement ;  and  afterwards,  at 
the  time  when  Ingelardus  de  Cygony*  was  constable  of  Bristol, 
he  [Geoffry]  was  taken  by  Elias  and  detained  in  prison  in  the 
Castle  of  Bristol  until  he  made  that  charter,  and  he  confesses 
fully  that  the  said  Agatha  and  Elena  did  not  disseise  him,  but 
[says  that]  Elias  [did].  He  says  that  he  obtained  the  writ  after 
the  death  of  Elias.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Geoffry 
should  take  nothing  by  this  assize,  and  that  he  be  in  mercy  for 
his  false  claim.     He  is  a  pauper. 

^  Engelard  de  Cigogn^  in  Touraine  was  a  kinsman  of  Gerard  of  Ath^,  the 
"foreign  adventurers  and  instruments  of  John's  misrule,"  as  Prof.  Maitland  calls 
them.  Engelard  succeeded  Gerard  as  sheriff  of  Gloucester.  He  was  also  constable 
of  Windsor.  For  an  account  of  him  see  the  Introduction  to  "  Pleas  of  the  Crown  for 
Gloucester  "  :  Maitland. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  83 

355.  Fulk  de  Merk,  who  arraigned  an  assize  of  novel  dis- 
seisin against  Hugh  de  Umone  {or  Unione  ?)  concerning  his  free 
tenement  in  Shipton,  has  withdrawn,  and  therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Hugh  de  Fonte  and  Richard  de 
Bosco,  are  in  mercy. 

356.  Peter  Boscard,  who  arraigned  an  assize  of  novel  dis- 
seisin against  Emma  de  Sutton'  and  Ralph  her  son,  concern- 
ing a  tenement  in  Sutton,  will  not  sue.  Therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Roger  Mar'  of  Shutton'  and  William 
Hare,  are  in  mercy. 

357.  Philip  de  Atteworth',  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  de  Wike, 
concerning  a  tenement  in  Eleworthe,  withdrew  himself  There- 
fore he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Richard  de  Upton 
and  Nicholas  de  Halum,  are  in  mercy. 

358.  Elias,  son  of  Adam  Stokes,  who  brought  an  assize  of 
novel  disseisin  against  Roger  de  Clifton  concerning  a  tenement 
in  Eston*,  will  not  prosecute.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  to  wit,  Ewales  de  Wrokeshal'  and  Elias  de  Portes- 
heved,  are  in  mercy. 

359.  Alda  Paynel,  who  has  arraigned  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  William  de  Marisco  and  many  others  concern- 
ing a  certain  dyke  thrown  down  in  Hunnespiir,  will  not  prose- 
cute. Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit, 
William  Cole  of  Hunespill'  and  Stephen  de  Mora,  are  in  mercy. 

360.  The  same  Alda,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  W^illiam  Lib'dy  and  many  others  concerning 
seven  dykes  raised  in  Hunespill',  will  not  prosecute.  Therefore 
she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  the  above  named,  are 
in  mercy. 

361.  Robert  Blund  {blundus)  and  Matilda  his  wife,  who 
brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin  against  Richard  de  Bate- 
cumbe  concerning  a  tenement  in  Batecumbe,  will  not  sue. 
Therefore  they  and  their  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Henry 
son  of  William  de  Draicote  and  Seman  de  Draicote,  are  in 
mercy. 

362.  The  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  comes  to  recognise 
whether  Philip  de  Fumell,  brother  of  Saher  de  Aldenham,  was 
seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  of  one-half  of  the  manor  of  Ar 
since  the  time  and  if  the  same  Saher  {mistake  for  Philip)  [died, 
etc],  which  half  of  the  said  manor  Henry  de  Furnell  holds,  who 


84  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

comes  and  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may  be  made], 
because  he  says  that  he  [Philip]  did  not  hold  that  land  in  fee 
otherwise  than  by  demise  {eU  ballia)  of  Henry  La  Pomeraie. 
The  jurors  say  that  in  truth  the  same  Philip,  at  the  time  of 
the  war,  was  seised  of  one-half  of  the  aforesaid  manor  but  not 
as  of  fee,  because  they  say  that  the  same  Philip  held  the  land 
by  demise  of  Henry  de  la  Pomereie,  the  lord  of  the  fee,  whilst 
the  same  Henry,  against  whom  the  assize  is  now  arraigned,  was 
under  age  and  in  the  custody  of  Simon  de  Furnell,  and  that  it 
is  true  that  the  same  Philip  died  seised  thereof,  but  not  as  of 
fee  as  is  alleged.  Therefore  Henry  is  quit  and  Saher  is  in 
mercy.  Afterwards  there  was  an  agreement ;  let  them  have 
the  chirograph.^ 

363.  Julia  de  Whittukesmed',  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Geoffry  de  Albo  monasterio  concerning  a 
tenement  in  Ekewik,  will  not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her 
pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  William  son  of  Osbert  de  Whit- 
tokesmede  and  Adam  the  reeve,  are  in  mercy. 

364.  William  de  Mariscis,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Adam,  concerning 
the  diversion  of  a  watercourse  in  Hunnespiir,  will  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledge  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Geoffry  de 
Barinton',  are  in  mercy. 

365.  Matilda,  daughter  of  Roger  Buel,  who  brought  an 
assize  of  novel  disseisin  against  Roger  de  Clifton  concerning  a 

enement  in  Radestoke,  will  not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and 
her  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Savaric  de  Chartres  and 
Waleran  de  Welesleg',  are  in  mercy. 

366.  The  Prior  of  Christchurch  of  Thiwingham  will  not  sue 
concerning  a  tenement  in  Clopton,  against  Ralph  Wac.  There- 
fore he  and  his  pledge  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Stephen  de  Esting', 
chamberlain  of  Glastonbury,  are  in  mercy. 

367.  Geoffry  de  Weston,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  William  son  of  John  touching  a  tenement  in 
Weston,  will  not  sue.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prose- 
cute to  wit,  John  son  of  Alan  and  Wales  de  Wrockeshal',  are 
in  mercy. 

368.  Adam  the  tailor  (le  parm$nter)  and  Albreda  his  wife, 

^  The  fine  is  dated  on  the  morrow  of  the  Nativity  of  the  Virgin,  9  Hen.  III. 
Saher  quit*claimed  to  Henry,  who  gave  him  loof.     "  Som.  Fines,"  p.  47,  No.  66. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  8$ 

■■■ —  ■ 

who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin  against  Robert  de 
Mariscis  concerning  a  tenement  in  Babinton',  will  not  sue. 
Therefore  they  and  their  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Hugh 
Tuneyre  and  Roger  Malivel,  are  in  mercy. 

369.  Robert  de  Esy  and  Alice  his  wife,  who  brought  an 
assize  of  novel  disseisin  against  Walter  Newecomen  touching  a 
tenement  in  Monte  Acuto,  will  not  sue.  Therefore  they  and 
their  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Robert  the  warrener  {le 
warener)  and  William  Quintin,  are  in  mercy. 

370. 

This  cntnr  is  apparently  of  the  same  character  as  those  immediately  preceding. 
It  »  almost  illegible,  but  enough  can  be  read  to  gather  that  it  relates  to  a  tenement 
in  Cnmpton',  that  Godfrey  de  Alno  is  arraigned  by  one  of  the  same  surname,  and  that 
one  of  the  latter's  pledges  is  Ralph  de  Insula. 

Memb,  8. 

371.  Inquiry  must  be  made  of  the  Bishop  of  Winton  con- 
cerning this  matter,  that  his  constable  at  Tantone  has  with  him 
a  certain  man  who  is  called  Lindesie,  who  protects  {premunit) 
thieves  when  they  ought  to  be  taken. 


The  Vill  of  Ivelcestr'. 

372.  Hugh  Spiring  and  Richard  Tailefer,  accused  of  theft, 
have  fled.  They  were  dwellers  in  Ivecestr*,  where  there  is  no 
frank-pledge.  They  are  suspected.  Therefore  let  them  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  Hugh's  chattels  were  worth  I2d. 
Richard  had  no  chattels. 

373.  Laurence  de  Langport  and  Christiana  his  wife,  who 
brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin  against  Robert  de  Midlutton 
touching  a  tenement  in  Ivelcestr'  have  come,  and  will  not 
sue.  Therefore  they  and  their  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit, 
Henry  de  Westour*  of  Lamport  and  Jordan  son  of  Gilbert  de 
Taunton',  are  in  mercy. 

374.  Richard  Beap'l  puts  in  his  place  Richard  Spigumel 
against  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of  Aylmer  le  Bret,  on  a  plea 
of  dower.* 


^  This  entry  hat  the  marginal  note  "  Denon*. 


( »f 


86  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS 


Memb.  9. 

375.  The  assize  of  novel  disseisin  between  James  de  Mun- 
sorel,  querent,  and  David  de  Haselberg,  deforciant,  touching  his 
free  tenement  in  Preston,  remains  because  James  has  died. 

376.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Curtenay  and  Richard  de  Aiscumb'  unjustly  and  witliout  judg- 
ment disseised  Idonea,  formerly  the  wife  of  Alexander  de 
Aiscumb*,  of  her  free  tenement  in  Aiscumb*  since  the  last,  etc. 
And  Robert  and  Richard  have  not  come.  They  were  attached 
by  Herbert  the  goldsmith  of  Cruk'  and  Algar  de  Cruk' ; 
therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  And  the  assize  is  taken  by 
default  Aften^-ards  Richard  comes,  and  fully  concedes  [that] 
the  assize  [may  be  made].  The  jurors  say  that  Robert  and 
Richard  did  disseise  her  unjustly  as  the  writ  says,  to  wit,  of 
half  a  virgate  of  land,  for  they  say  that  the  same  Alexander, 
formerly  husband  of  Idonea,  by  the  grant  and  wish  of  the 
said  Richard,  endowed  {per  concessionem  et  voluntatem  predicti 
Ricardi  dotavit^  etc)  her  with  half  of  one  virgate  of  land.  On 
the  death  of  Alexander  she  remained  in  seisin  of  that  half, 
together  with  a  moiety  of  a  certain  mill,  and  other  appurte- 
nances. Then  came  Richard  and  put  himself  in  counsel  with  the 
aforesaid  Robert ;  and  after\vards  they  came  and  disseised  her,  in 
that  Robert  gave  the  crop  {t^esturam)  of  that  tenement  to  Robert 
le  Bastard.  Therefore  let  her  have  her  seisin,  and  Robert  and 
Richard  are  in  mercy.     Damages,  30J.' 

377.  Richard  Swift,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
against  John  de  Hauecwell*  touching  a  tenement  in  Haueci^cir, 
does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute, 
to  wit,  Gilbert  Travers  and  Alexander  the  fisherman,  are  in 
mercy. 

378.  Henry  de  Mudeford',  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Fulk  de  Braute'  and  Maurice  le  Gant  concern- 
ing a  tenement  in  Oterhampton,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore 
he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit,  Stephen  de  Elston'  and 
William  de  Goviz,  are  in  mercy.     The  amercement  is  pardoned.* 


.♦ » 


'  There  is  a  marginal  note  stnick  out,  which  I  read  as  "eras  apud  Skirehurn,^ 
•  For  Falkes  de  Breaute  see  **  Dictionary  of  National  Biography.*' 
'  To  this  entry  there  is  a  marginal  nole,  similar  to  that  aiuched  to  Na  376,  also 
erased. 


I 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  87 

379.  Robert  de  Blakeford',  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 

isin  against  John  de  Boterell*  and  many  others  concerning 

a.  certain  dyke  thrown  down  in  Maperton,  came  and  withdrew 

hinr^sclf.    Therefore  he  and   his   pledges  to  prosecute,  to   wit, 

AVilliam  de  Berwe  and  Robert  Rod*nia,  are  in  mercy. 

38a  The  sheriff  is  instructed  that  he  must  proceed  to  all  the 

luids  which  were  of  Thomas  de  Campo  Florido,  taking  with 

hinr&    twelve  knights  to  be  chosen  by  consent  of  the  parties,  and 

*^y  ^^lieir  oaths  make  an  extent  and  valuation  of  all  the  lands 

^'^^c^i  were  of  Thomas,  and  cause  them  to  be  divided  into  three 

Pj^5"ts.     One-third  part,  wholly  in  Alardeston,  he  shall  assign  to 

jY*lIiani   le   Waleis   {Waliensis)   and    Nichola  his  wife   as  the 

of  Nichola,  in  such  wise  that  if  the  whole  of  the  land  in 

"^ton*  should  suffice  for  one-third  part  of  all  the  aforesaid 

,        ^s    let  it  remain  to  the  said  William  and  Nichola.     If  there 

i^^^^Jci   be   more   [than   sufficient]   let   the   surplus   be  divided 

^m    ^^^^^^n  Ralph  le  Waleis  (  Wailensis)  and  Joan  his  wife,  one  of 

^^^   ^^.ughters  and  heirs  of  the  said  Thomas,  and  Matilda,  the 

Y^rf^^^     daughter  and  heir  of  Thomas,  who  is  in  the  custody  of 

^^^'^ii^  son  of  Joel.     Let  the  residue  of  the  whole  of  the  inheri- 

w    ^^^      which  was  of   Thomas   be   divided   between  Joan   and 

p|^^*lcia,  saving  to  Joan  her  privilege  of  seniority  {aesnescia\  in 

jj^^^^^is.     Thus   let  Matilda  have  one   messuage  in  the  vill  of 

l^^^'^'^is  to  the  value  of  the  capital   messuage   of  Alarston'  in 

l^^^^^Vi  and  breadth.     And  let  Matilda,  the  youngest  daughter, 

\^^       of  Joan.     And  if  Warin,  who  formerly  held  part  of  that 

1j^«^*»    should  hold  more  than  the  part  which  should  belong  to 

^f  ^^ilda,  let  the  surplus  go  to  Joan.     And  in  the  same  manner, 

^    V^^  said  William,  together  with  Joan,  should  hold  more  [than 

-^^^^    shares]  the  surplus   should   go   to    Matilda.       And    let 

^^*^ition   be  made  of  demesnes   and   advowsons   of  churches 

^^^    of  the  ser\'ices  of  free  men  and  of  all  other  things.     The 

^^**iff  must  also  inquire,  by  the  oaths  of  the  aforesaid  knights, 

^*^^t  damage  and  in  what  things  the  same  William  has  caused 

^  Warin  on  behalf  of  Matilda,  when  [William]  disseised  him. 

'^^d  let   him  make  a  return  of  the  inquisition,  and  by  what 

V^rticulars  he  shall   make   the  extent   and   valuation,   to   the 

justices  at  Wilton  on  Saturday  next  before  Michaelmas  by  two 

lof  the  knights].    And  let  him  distrain  William  that  if  he  should 

have  caused  any  damage  to  Warin,  he  should  there  have  the 

Qioncy  for  such  damage,  and  in  the  like  manner  Warin.     And, 


88  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

-     . ■  * 

the  inquisition  being  heard  at  Wilton',  let  the  matter  be  ad- 
journed to  Westminster  on  a  day  given  to  the  parties,  to  wit,  in 
one  month  after  Michaelmas.^  And  let  all  remain  at  home, 
because  they  have  been  summoned  for  this  except  William  and 
Warin.  And  Warin  puts  in  his  place  William  le  Daneis,  and 
William  puts  in  his  place  Ralph  le  Waleis. 

381.  Roger  de  Sancto  Laudo  is  elected  coroner,  together 
with  William  de  Bakelr',  Richard  de  Cumbe,  and  Peter  de 
Pudinton',  and  he  is  sworn  that  he  will  faithfully  keep  the  pleas 
of  the  crown  and  will  faithfully  do  the  business  of  our  lord  the 
King  appertaining  to  the  crown. 

Memb,  10. 

Essoins  taken  at  Ivelcestr*,  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  in  the 
tenth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

(The  words  in  italics  are  run  through  in  the  original.) 

382.  (a)  William  Briwere^  by  Nicholas  de  Bosco  and  Nicholas 
de  Sowi  upon  a  common  summons} 

{b)  Tlu  lord  of  Winton^  by  Philip  and  John^  his  messengers^ 
upon  the  like. 

(c)  Richard  Thalebol,  by  Geoffry  Rempe  upon  the  like. 
{d)  David  Basset,  by  Alexander  de  Bosco  upon  the  like. 

'  The  proceedings  at  Westminster  are  to  be  found  recorded  in  Curia  Regis  Roll* 
No.  94,  Memb.  6  : — "  It  is  agreed  between  Warine  son  of  Joel,  guardian  of  the 
youngest  daughter  of  Thomas  de  Campo  Florido,  and  William  le  Waleis  (fVa/Zensis) 
and  Nichola  his  wife,  Ralph  son  of  William,  and  the  eldest  daughter  of  the  same 
Thomas,  concerning  the  dower  of  Nichola,  which  fell  to  her,  ot  the  free  tenement 
which  was  of  Thomas,  formerly  husband  of  Nichola.  to  wit,  that  the  whole  manor  of 
Iliwis,  with  the  appurtenances,  should  remain  to  William  and  Nichola  his  wife  in 
duwer  (in  dotem)^  except  the  advowson  of  the  church  of  the  same  vill,  which  should 
remain  to  the  daughters,  and  [that]  the  whole  land  of  Alardeston  should  be  divided 
between  Ralph  and  his  wife  and  the  youngest  daughter,  saving  to  Ralph's  wife  the 
capital  messuage,  so  that  before  the  land  should  be  divided  iht  youngest  daughter 
should  have  one  messuage  of  the  common  property  at  the  choice  of  W^arine,  according 
to  the  size  of  the  capital  messuage  in  length  and  breadth  ;  and  afterwards,  when  the 
land  should  be  divided,  she  should  have  of  the  share  of  Ralph  and  his  wife  two  and 
a-half  acres  of  land  and  half  an  acre  of  meadow  in  support  of  her  house.  Vet,  never- 
theless, William  and  Nichola,  in  respect  of  the  manor  of  Hiwis,  are  to  pay  every  year 
to  the  said  daughters  15a.,  to  wit,  y\d.  to  each.  This  agreement  is  made,  saving  to 
the  mother  of  ihe  said  1  homas  her  dower,  which  she  has  in  the  whole  of  the  tene- 
ments for  her  life."  From  this  it  appears  that  there  were  two  dowagers  :  first,  the 
grandmother ;  next,  Nichola,  the  mother  of  the  three  co-parceners,  daughters  of  Thomas 
de  Campo  Flondo. 

*  The  word  *'  ah'H  "  is  written  over  Nicholas  de  Sowi. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  89 

(e)  Philip  de  Albaniaco,  by  Robert  Godriz  upon  the  like.    In 
the  service  of  our  lord  the  King. 

(/*)  Ralph  de  Wancy,  by  William  de  Litletori  upon  the  like, 

\g)  John  de  Ren,  by  Richard  de  Weston*  upon  the  like.     In 
the  service  of  our  loni  the  King. 

(Ji)  John  de  Peanton',  by  William  de   Weleton*  upon   the 
Uke. 

ff)  John  de  BriweSy  by  John  de  Werlam  upon  the  like. 

{JD  The  Prior  oj  Christeclurche^  by  Roger  de  Pidele  upon  the 
like. 

{k)  Roger  de  Cliffton\  by  Walter  de  Stokes  upon  tlu  like.  On 
the  quindene  oj  Michaelmas  at  Westminster 

(/)  Tlu  Abbess  oJ  WerwelC^  by  Jehellus  son  of  Robert  de  la 
Bruere  upon  the  like. 

(m)  John  MarescalFy  by  Robert  de  Haveneberg*  and  by  William 
son  of  Ralph  upon  the  like.  In  the  service  of  our  lord  the 
King. 

(if)  Hubert  de  BurgOy  by  Gilbert  de  Kaumel  upon  the  like. 

Ift)  Hugh  de  Godeshill,  by  Robert  de  Barewe  upon  the  like. 

(/)  Ralph  de  Aure^  by  Gerard  de  Aure  upon  the  like.  It  is 
said  that  he  is  sick  in  bed. 

{q)  Robert  le  Ware,  by  Simon  the  baker  upon  the  like. 

(r)  Peter  Blund  {le  Blund)^  by  Andrew  son  of  Herbert  and 
Richard  Raukes,  by  reason  of  death  in  Gascony. 

(s)  John  le  Deneys,  by  Richard  de  Bagworthe  of  Gascony 
upon  a  common  [summons].     Gascony. 

(/)  Henry  le  Chareter,  by  Richard  de  Sumerton*  upon  the 
like. 

(//)  Walter  le  Rumesie  by  Roger  Pigace  upon  the  like. 

(«)  William  de  Ruhill',  by  Walter  Nuntin  upon  the  like. 

(v)  AgneSy  wife  of  Roger  de  KalcmundeUy  by  Richard  tlu 
clerky  de  malo  veniendiy  against  William  le  Bret  upon  an  assize  of 
mart  d'ancestor} 

(w)  Roger  de  Clifford* ^  by  Henry  Crec  and  by  Walter  son  of 
Stephen  upon  a  common  [summons]. 

{x)   William  de  Waifordy  by  John  Deket  upon  the  like. 

(^)  Sitnon  de  Dunigton\  by  John  de  Shepton*  upon  the  like. 

{3)  Henry  de  Mudford\  by  Henry  de  Nereberd  upon  the  like. 

(2tf)  Robert  de  Veteri  ponte,  by  Henry  de  Wike  upon  the 
like. 

'  There  is  a  marginal  note  *'  alibi, " 


90  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

(2b)  William  de  Cantu  lupo,  by  Randal  de  Ocford*  upon  the 
like. 

{2c)  Nicholaa  de  la  Hate,  by  Robert  Warner  upon  the  like. 

{2d)  Richard  son  of  Arthur,  by  Richard  Beket  upon  the  like, 

(2e)  Tlu  Abbess  of  St.  Edward^  by  William  de  Delveston  upon 
the  like. 

(2/)  Robert  de  Vallibus,  by  Angerus  de  Sevenhamton'  upon 
the  like. 

{2g)  William  Flandr\  by  William  the  Irishman  upon  the 
like, 

(2//)   William  DewiaSy  by  Ralph  son  of  Simon  upon  the  like, 

(2/)  Thomas  de  Kenety  by  Adam  de  Galametoti  upon  the 
like. 

(2;*)  Robert  le  Sor,  by  Thomas  Parun  upon  the  like. 

(2^)  Robert  Michel,  by  William  Michel  upon  the  like. 

(2/)  Henry  de  Wedden,  by  William  Barberel  upon  the  like, 

(2m)  James  son  of  Gerrard,  by  Robert  Lundi  upon  the  like. 

(2n)  A  lured  de  Lent,  by  Samson  Revel  upon  the  like. 

{20)  Roger  Tifely  by  William  de  Comtori  upon  the  like.  He 
comes. 

(2/)  Joceus  de  Baiocis,  by  Richard  le  Grom  upon  the  like. 

{2q)  John  cU  Prewrise,  by  Godefried  Sauvage  upon  tlu  like, 

(2r)  Jordan  del  Aunney,  by  Roger  del  Aunney  upon  the 
like. 

(2j)  Robert  fitz  Payne,  by  John  the  cook  upon  the  like.  He 
comes. 

(2/)  Robert  de  Mucegros,  by  Scot  upon  the  like. 

(2tt)  Robert  de  Curtenay,  by  Thomas  Gaipin  and  Adam 
Ranun  upon  the  like. 

{2v)  William  de  Aumere,  by  William  le  Norreis  upon  the 
like. 

(2w)  Hugh  de  Dundon  by  Simon  Pinchehaste  upon  the  like 

(2jr)  Nicholas  de  la  Mara,  by  Richard  de  la  Mare  upon  the 
like. 

(2j/)  Ralph  le  Meriet,  by  Robert  Sherewund  upon  the  like. 

{2z)  Herbert  de  Pin,  by  Simon  Noblet  upon  the  like. 

(3^)  John  son  of  Richard,  by  Drogo  de  Bethevill'  upon  a 
common  [summons],  and  he  is  in  Gascony. 

(3^)    William  de  Moretonig,  by  Roger  Russel  upon  tlu  like. 

\ic)  Ralph  de  Wuallibus^  by  Nicholas  le  Bule  upon  the 
like. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  9 1 


{3d)  William  the  forester  of  Frome,  by  Robert  Fareman  upon 
the  like. 

(3^)  Richard  de  Muchegros,  by  Robert  de  Sindertome  upon 
the  like. 

(3/)  Philip  de  Sarmunwill*,  by  Solomon  de  Chillecumb*  upon 
the  nice. 

(3^)  Zfe  Abbot  of  Cyrencestf^y  by  Ricliard  Curteys  and  Robert 
Warner  upon  the  like. 

ilk)  Thomas  de  Evercy,  by  Henry  de  Holeweie  and 
William  de  Alwinton  upon  the   like. 

(31)  John  le  Malherb*,  by  Richard  le  Bel  upon  the  like. 

(37)  Hugh  le  Despenser,  by  Henry  his  son  upon  the  like. 

(3^)  Huward*  de  Bikeleg',  by  Alan  his  reeve  upon  the  like. 

(3/)  Baldwin  le  Despenser,  by  Ralph  de  Clopton  upon  the 
like. 

(3w)  William  Mautravers,  by  Roger  Gurnard  upon  the  like. 

(3«)   William  Fossard,  by  William  Godewin' upon  the  like. 

(3^)  Albreda  de  Botreaus,  by  William  de  Cheden'  upon 
the  like. 

(3^)  William  de  Deudecumbe,  by  Peter  Russel  upon  the  like. 
A  day  [is  given]  on  the  quindene  of  Michaelmas  at  Westminster. 
He  has  pledged  his  faith. 

(3^7)  Robert  de  Novo  Burgo,  by  William  de  Dcrcestr*  upon 
the  like. 

(3r)  Margery  de  Novo  Burgo,  by  Richard  Biagraing  upon  the 
like. 

(3^)  Ralph  Malet,  by  Osbert  Quarrel  upon  the  like.  He 
comes. 

(3/)  William  de  Barri,  by  Ralph  Lote  upon  the  like.  In  the 
service  of  our  lord  the  King  in  Ireland. 

(3«)  Alan  Pain,  by  Martin  de  Escaudeford'  upon  the  like. 

(3^)  Sybil  de  Unframwill',  by  Anketill*  Young  upon  the 
like. 

(3Zf/)  TJu  Prior  of  Bermundeseie,  by  Thomas  de  Londe  upon 
the  like, 

(3ir)  The  Prior  of  Bradeleg*,by  Richard  the  Archer  upon  the 
like 

iZy)  Geoffry  Bineham,  by  Herbert  de  Bokelond'  upon  the 
like. 

(3j)  William  de  Wideworth,  by  Stephen  de  Cumton'  upon 
the  like,  and  he  is  in  Gascony. 


92  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

(4a)  Rogo  son  of  Simon,  by  Robert  son  of  Garun  upon  the 
like,  and  he  is  in  Gascony. 

(4^)  Roger  Alis,  by  Richard  de  Bosington  upon  the  same. 

(4^)  Roger  Smethe,  by  Roger  le  Tot  for  death. 

(4//)  William  le  Gras,  by  Hugh  de  Cumb'  upon  the  like 
(presumably  upon  a  common  summons). 

(4^)  Ricliard  de  Ledsede^  by  DuratuT  Sumerton  upon  the 
like. 

(4/)  The  Prior  of  Winton',  by  Adam  de  Blendun'  upon  the 
like. 

(4^)  John  de  Monte  Acuto^  by  RicJiard  Posit  upon  the  like. 

(4//)  The  Abbot  of  Grastame,  by  Arnard  de  Norton  upon 
the  like. 

(4/*)  Walter  de  Eley,  by  Walter  Turme  .  .  el  upon  the  like. 

(4;')  Thomas  de  Porter,  by  Ralph  de  la  Throp  upon  the  like. 

(4>&)  James  de  Orchard,  by  Richard  le  Pare  upon  the  like. 

(4/)  Alan  de  Stapele,  by  Robert  Portebeure  upon  the  like. 

{^tn)  Humfrey  de  Scovill,  by  William  de  Brockeleg'  upon 
the  like. 

(4«)  Richard  de  Say,  by  Alan  de  Baiocis  upon  the  like. 

(4^)  William  de  Redeford^  by  Hugh  de  Brigford  upon  the 
like. 

(4^)  Roys*  de  Stanton,  by  John  son  of  Amald  upon  the 
like. 

(4^)  William  de  Putoe,  by  Robert  de  Porteshave  upon  the 
like. 

(4r)  Hugh  de  Mara,  by  Benedict  de  Wrockeshale  upon  the 
like. 

Memb,  lod. 

{4s)  The  Prior  of  Edereston',  by  Hugh  Bumgard  upon  the 
like. 

(4/)  Andrew  de  Stretton,  by  William  de  la  Redeslo  upon  the 
like. 

(4«)  Roger  de  Langeford,  by  Hugh  de  G    .    .     , 

{4v)  Roger  son  of  Nicholas,  by  Stephen  de  Blayf  upon  the 
like. 

(4ZC/)  The  Prior  of  Golclive,  by  William  de  Prestori  upon  the 
like, 

(4^)  William  de  Kanvill,  by  Richard  le  Lugedon*  upon  the 
like. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  93 


{4j^)  Richard de  Chillehe^^  by  Nicholas  the  palmer  {le  Paumer) 
upon  the  like.     He  comes. 

(4?)  Walter  Huse,  by  Robert  de  Crumhale  upon  the  like. 

(5^)  Roger  de  Vilers,  by  Godefried  le  Ruter  upon  the  like. 

(5^)  Agnes  de  Windesores,  by  Thomas  de  la  Yurda  upon 
the  like. 

(5^)  Robert  de  Barneviir,  by  Ralph  de  Craft  upon  the  like. 

(5^  Osbert  di  Eston,  by  William  de  H anion*  upon  the  like. 

(5^)  Henry  de  Franckenney,  by  William  Pede  upon  the  like. 

(5/*)  Johel  de  Valle  Torta,  by  Samson  de  Curipole  upon  the 
like. 

(S^)  Master  William  de  Spakeston',  by  Richard  Aulclop  upon 
the  like. 

(5A)  Walter  de  Wike,  by  Augustin  Choum  upon  the  like. 

(51)  Philip  de  Kaleston,  by  Robert  son  of  John  upon  the  like. 

(5/^  Randal  de  Hurleg',  by  William  de  Lintemere  upon  the 
like. 

(5>&)  Hugh  de  Gumay,  by  John  Young  upon  the  like. 

(5/)  Martin  son  of  William,  by  William  Curecy  upon  the  like. 

(5«r)  Henry  de  Holta,  by  Roger  de  Holta  upon  the  like.  In 
the  service  of  the  King. 

(5«)  Robert  de  Sutton*,  by  Ailof  de  Sutton'  upon  the  like. 

(5^)  John  Harefot,  by  Richard  Harefot  upon  the  like. 

(5/)  Payn  de  Barri,  by  Michael  de  Res  and  Adam  son  of 
Odo. 

(5^)  Roger  Ailard,  by  Walter  Kachepol  upon  the  like. 

(5r)  Philip  Long,  by  Roger  Garlond'  upon  the  like. 

(5.^)  Agnes  de  Heidun',  by  Walter  de  Emundesham  upon 
the  like. 

(5/)   William  de  Fennes^  by  William  the  Irishman  upon  the  like, 

(5«)  Jordan  de  Holton\  by  Peter  Bugeburi  upon  the  like, 

\^v)   F//^ -fi/ar^^j'w^,  by  Adam  de  Docking. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  on  pleas  of  land  : 

iSw)  Agnes,  wife  of  Roger  de  Kalemunden,  against  William 
le  Bret  upon  a  plea  of  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  by  Richard  the 
clerk.  A  day  [is  given  her]  on  Wednesday  next  after  the  quin- 
dene  of  the  Nativity  of  the  Blessed  Virgin,  at  Wilton.  He  has 
pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Roger,  the  husband 
of  Agnes,  in  banco. 


94  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

(5jr)  William  Briwerr*  against  the  court  (tP  cuF)  on  a  plea  of 
right  (de  pi  Ju9^  touching  the  manor  of  Cheddeseie  by  Nicholas 
de  Bosco.  A  day  [is  given  him]  on  the  quindene  of  Michaelmas 
at  Westminster  by  the  pledge  of  William  le  Escot. 

(S^')  William  Maltravers  against  the  heir  of  John  Maltravers 
on  a  plea  of  the  hearing  of  a  record  by  Roger  Gurnard.  On  the 
octave  of  Michaelmas  at  Westminster.  He  has  pledged  his 
faith.     The  record  is  made.^ 

383.  Memb.  ir. 

The  chattels  of  Richard  Sedlep  and         \\s.    8rf.,    for    which 
Richard  le  Futur,  hanged.*  the     sheriff    [must 

answer]. 

^  As  to  the  making  of  a  record  see  ante,  No.  293. 

'  At  first  sight  the  schedules  numbered  in  this  book  383  and  3S4,  and  the  returns 
to  the  inquisitions  (No.  385)  seem  obscure  ;  but  upon  a  careful  examination  of  their 
contents,  and  comparison  with  the  pleas  in  the  earlier  parts  of  the  roll,  the  scheme 
upon  which  they  are  framed  seems  reasonably  clear.  No.  383  contains:  (i)  the 
amercements  imposed  in  respect  of  various  specified  matters,  for  example,  upon 
tithings  and  pledges  for  not  producing  their  men,  upon  persons  convicted  of  disseisin, 
or  of  making  false  claims,  etc. :  and  (2)  the  values  of  the  chattels  of  convicted ' 
prisoners  and  fugitive  persons.  No.  384  also  contains  values  of  chattels  of  prisoners 
and  fugitives.  The  difference  between  the  two  schedules  in  this  respect  seems  to  be 
this :  When  the  value  of  the  chattels  was  returned  at  the  time  of  the  trial  and 
conviction,  as  must  often  have  been  the  case  when  the  chattels  had  previously  been 
appraised  in  the  county  court  and  their  value  entered  in  the  coroners'  rolb  which 
were  delivered  to  the  justices,  or  is  stated  from  other  information  in  the  note  of  the 
case,  it  is  entered  in  No.  383.  See,  for  examples,  Nos.  123,  129,  139,  159,  172,  173, 
177,  etc.  Where  the  value  was  not  so  returned  and  an  inquiry  was  directed,  the 
result  of  the  inquiry  is  given  in  No.  385,  upon  the  statement  of  the  hundred  taken  on 
an  inquisition,  and  is  then  entered  in  No.  384.  See,  for  examples,  Nos,  105,  1 14, 
140,  164,  165,  etc.  In  a  very  few  instances,  possibly,  both  processes  were  used.  The 
values  stated  in  the  note  of  the  conviction  are  entered  in  No.  383 ;  then,  for  some 
reason,  an  inquiry  seems  to  have  been  thought  necessary,  with  Uie  result,  except  in 
one  case,  of  confirming  the  previous  return  :  see  Nos.  123,  217,  and  219.  tt  is 
possible,  of  course,  that  the  values  in  these  three  cases  may  have  been  added  to  the 
note  of  the  conviction  after  the  inquisitions  weie  held,  but  it  does  not  seem  probable, 
and  the  appearance  of  the  roll  is.  I  think,  against  it.  The  exception  is  in  the  case  of 
Robert  Gulye,  No.  173.  Here  the  inquisition  finds  the  value  to  be  less  than  the 
original  figure  by  \5.  zd.  Nevertheless,  the  clerk  has  not  seen  fit  to  correct  the 
schedule  in  the  interest  of  the  sheriff,  who  is  to  answer.  Some  exceptions  to  the 
practice  which  I  have  suggested  may  be  found.  There  was  an  inquest  m  the  case  of 
Nicholas  the  Frenchman  (No.  257),  although  there  is  no  note  against  the  case  that 
such  was  directed  ;  and  in  the  case  of  Nicholas  the  Gardener  (No.  212),  where  there  is 
such  a  direction,  there  is  no  mention  of  an  inquest.  The  schedules,  when  completed, 
were  no  doubt  forwarded  to  the  Exchequer,  whence  issued  in  due  course  to  the 
sheriff,  a  summons  of  the  Pipe,  calling  upon  him  to  account  to  the  Treasur)'  for  all 
these  sums.      The  summons  of  the  Pipe  was  practically  in  the  same  form  as  the 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


95 


The  chattels  of  Humphrey  le   Hunte, 

outlawed.^ 
The     chattels    of    Matilda    le     Futur, 

waived. 
William  de  Luccombe,  because  he  had 

not   Henry   de   Holt,   whose    pledge 

he  was. 
William  de  Keteford,  for  the  like 
John  Bretasche,  for  the  like 
William  de  Estone,  for  the  like 
Richarde  de  Houe,  for  the  like 
William  de  Sandhill,  for  the  like 
Geoffry  de  Lukumbe,  for  the  like 
Thomas  de  Wike,  for  the  like 
Geoffry  de  Barington,  for  the  like 
Ralph  Soreir,  for  the  like 
Robert  de  Trebrig',  for  the  like.    He  has 

nothing. 
Reginald  de  Badialton,  for  the  like 
The  chattels  of  John  and  Reginald  de 

Legh,  fugitives. 
The   tithing   of   the   Prior  of  Tanton* 

without  the  gate  of  Tanton',  for  the 

flight  of  William  Wicking. 
The  tithing  of  the  Wodelande,  for  the 

flight  of  Walter  Budde. 
The    chattels    of   the   same   Walter,  a 

fugitive. 
The    chattels    of    Roger     Wodecot,    a 

fugitive. 
The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Blakedone,  for 

the  flight  of  Richard  de  Crues. 


3^.,     for     which    the 

sheriff,  etc. 
35".,    for     which    the 

sheriff,  etc. 
Half  a  mark. 


Half 

a  mark. 

I  mark. 

I  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Half 

a  mark. 

Ts,  6a 

r 

•  m 

Half 

a  mark. 

I  OS. 

los.y    for    which    the 

sheriff,  etc. 
20S.    iid.y  for   which 

the  sheriff,  etc. 
Half  a  mark. 


schedule.  Unfortunately,  there  are  no  documents  of  this  kind  in  existence  for  so  early 
a  date,  so  that  the  process  of  collecting  the  King's  revenue  in  this  particular  case 
cannot  further  be  traced  in  the  records.  To  most  of  the  returns  of  the  inquisitions 
there  is  appended  a  note  **  est "  or  "  non  est"  as  the  case  may  be.  I  take  this  note 
to  mean  that  the  value  found  on  the  inquisition  has  already  been  entered  in  the 
schedule,  or  it  has  not.  All  to  which  the  note  **  non  est  "  appears  are  therefore  put 
into  No.  384,  which  is,  in  fact,  a  supplemental  list  or  account  against  the  sheriff. 

*  This  seems  to  be  a  clerical  error.     Humphrey  was  hanged.     Richard  Sedlep 
and  Richard  le  Futur  escaped,  and  were  outlaw^.     See  No.  115. 


\ 


96 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Stones  Walter 
of  Esseleg*,  for  the  flight  of  John  le 
Mowere. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  John,  a  fugi- 
tive. 

The  tithing  of  Cherleton  Muchegos,  for 
the  flight  of  Adam  the  palmer  {le 
Paumer), 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Adam,  a  fugi- 
tive. 

The  tithing  of  Gemefeld*,  for  the  flight  of 
Richard  le  Savoner. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Richard,  a 
fugitive. 

The  township  of  Kingeston*,  for  default 

The  tithing  of  Richard  Forester  in  New- 
ton', for  the  flight  of  Robert  Bakun. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Robert,  a  fugi- 
tive. 

The  township  of  Leng',  for  its  false 
presentment. 

The  tithing  of  Walter  de  Hereford  in  Lil- 
lesdon*,  for  the  flight  of  Richard  le  Futur. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Richard,  a  fugi- 
tive. 

The  tithing  of  Stokes  next  Holeweie,  for 
the  flight  of  Osbert  son  of  John. 

The  tithing  of  Litle  Cantokesheved,  for 
the  flight  of  Reginald  Gupyl. 

The  tithing  of  Radingeton',  for  the  flight 
of  William  Berd. 

The  chattels  of  William  Ded,  outlawed 


The  chattels  which  John  de  Regny  took 

of  the  thieves. 
The    tithing   of    the    vill  of  Chiu,  for 

the   flight  of  Gilbert  Woodecoc  and 

Richard  his  brother. 
The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Sutton*,  for  the 

flight  of  John  Harulf 


I  mark. 


3^.  6d,  for  which  the 

sheriff*,  etc. 
Half  a  mark. 


{Blank  in  the  Roll). 

Half  a  mark. 

3j.,   for     which    the 

sheriff",  etc 
I  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 

5^.  6rf. 

I  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

4^.,    for     which    the 

sheriff",  etc. 
Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

gs,  2d,y  for  which  Peter 
de  Malo  lacu  must 
answer. 

8j.,  for  which  the 
sheriff,  etc. 

Half  a  mark. 


Half  a  mark. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


97 


The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Cumbe  of 
Thomas  de  Haiweie,  for  the  flight  of 
Robert  Dun. 

The  chattels  of  Roger  the  Devon  man 
{Deuofi\  a  fugitive,  who  abjured  the 
realm. 

The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Hilecumbe,  for 
the  flight  of  Thomas  de  la  Pute. 

The  township  of  Kury  Malet,  for  the 
flight  of  Ranulf  Bast. 

The  township  of  Stineleg*,  for  harbouring 
Walter  Blund  (Blundus\  who  had  ab- 
jured the  realm. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Walter 

The    chattels    of    Roger    le     Syur    of 

Cumbe,  a  fugitive. 
The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  D  .  .  .  [ouliz] 

and   Ralph   Wac,  for    the    flight    of 

Herbert  Quarel. 
The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Eston,  for  the 

flight  of  Philip  the  shepherd  {le  Berker), 

and  William  Fuel. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  Philip    and 

William. 
The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Wymfred,  for 

the  flight  of  William  son  of  Odo. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  William 
The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Cherleton  Kan- 

vill,  for  the  flight  of  William  Penne. 
The   chattels   of   the   same  William,   a 

fugitive. 
The  chattels  of   William    de    Cumbe, 

brother  of  Maurice   the   chaplain,   a 

fugitive. 
The    township    of   Mileburne,   because 

they  made   no   pursuit   after  Walter 

Wikere,  a  fugitive. 
The  township  of  Cumpton'  Godfrey,  for 

harbouring  William  the  shepherd,  not 

in  tithing. 


Half  a  mark. 

6^/.,  for    which     the 
sheriff",  etc. 

Half  a  mark. 

I05. 

I  mark. 


2  marks,  for  which  the 

sheriff,  etc. 
8^/.,    for     which    the 

sheriff*,  etc. 
Half  a  mark. 


Half  a  mark. 


[l05.?]6^. 

Half  a  mark. 

I  mark. 

I  Si".  id,y  for  which  the 

sheriff,  etc. 
2s.,    for    which     the 

sheriff,  etc. 

I  mark. 


I  mark. 


98 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Wiggeberg', 
for  the  flight  of  Nicholas  le  Gardiner. 

The  tithing  of  Wandelestr'  Oliver,  for  the 
flight  of  Henry  son  of  Ralph. 

The  chattels  of  Simon  Shiterok.  hanged. 

The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Meriet,  for  the 
flight  of  Ralph  de  Taile. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Ralph,  a  fugi- 
tive. 

The  tithing  of  the  vill  of  Waiford,  for  the 
flight  of  Adam  de  VValdredesheie. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  Adam,  a  fugi- 
tive. 

The  chattels  of  Geoffry  the  tailor  of 
Erneshill,  a  fugitive. 

The  township  of  Dunestore,  for  harbour- 
ing William  le  Flemeng*  and  John 
Portman,  not  in  tithing. 

The  tithing  of  Widecumbe,  for  the  flight 
of  William  de  Hulle. 

The  chattels  of  the  same  William,  a 
fugitive. 

The  tithing  of  Dunevde,  for  the  flight  of 

Jordan  Chagge. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  Jordan 

The    chattels  of    Robert  the   miller  of 

Middelton,    who     has     abjured     the 

realm. 
The  tithing  of  Almundeford,  for  the  flight 

of  Gervase  son  of  Walter. 
The  tithing  of  Gerlinc',  for  the  flight  of 

Roger  Blake. 
The   tithing   of  Westbriweton',   for  the 

flight  of  Robert  Popelere. 
The  tithing  of  Eswike,  for  the  flight  of 

Hugh  Droskere  and  his  companions. 
The  tithing  of  Badecumbc,  for  the  flight 

of  Robert  le  Batur'. 


Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

{Blank), 
Half  a  mark. 

lOJ.,    for   which    the 

sheriff*,  etc. 
Half  a  mark. 

gs,  4^/.,  for  which 
Peter  de  Malo  lacu 
must  answer. 

4y.,  for  which  the 
sheriflT,  etc. 

I  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

6s.  4^/..  for  which 
Peter  de  Malo  lacu 
must  answer. 

Half  a  mark. 

22S,     for    which   the 

sheriflT,  etc. 
1 2d, 

Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  99 

■ 

The  tithing  of  Berton',  for  the  flight  of    Half  a  mark. 

Nicholas  the  Frenchman. 
The  chattels  of  Walter  Black,  outlawed     26s.  4^/.,  for  which  the 

sheriff,  etc. 
The   chattels  of  Walter  Bule  of  Cote,     25*.,  for  which  Peter.  .  . 

hanged.  .    .     . 

The   tithing  of  Esse,  for  the   flight  of    Half  a  mark. 

Adam     Laneles     and     Richard     his 

brother. 
The  tithing  of  Budekele,  for  the   flight     Half  a  mark. 

of  Richard  Ruffus. 
The  tithing  of  Chantun,  for  the  flight  of    Half  a  mark. 

William  Piperwhite. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  William,  a  fugi-     32^.,   for    which    the 

tive.  sheriff,  etc. 

The  tithing  of  Bedeminstr*,  for  the  flight     Half  a  mark. 

of  Josceus  the  carpenter. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  Josceus,  a  fugi-     4s. 

tive. 
Peter  de  Malo  lacu.  lOOJ.,  which    he    re- 

ceived    from     the 
Abbot  of  Glaston 
for    .     .     . 
The  tithing  of  Melnes,  for  the  flight  of    Half  a  mark. 

Adam  le  Flowelere.^ 
The  tithing  of  Preston'  of  the  monks,  for     Half  a  mark. 

the  flight  of  Hugh  Swere. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  Hugh,  a  fugi-    6s.  4^. 

tive. 
The  tithing  of  Exton,  for  the  flight  of    Half  a  mark. 

William  son  of  Harding*. 
The  chattels  of  the  same  William,  a  fugi-    4s.  6d. 

tive.* 
Henry  de  Ortiaco,  who  withdrew  himselP 
Master   Alexander  de   Dorset,  for  dis- 
seisin.* 

*  At  the  side  of  this  entry  is  the  following  :  "  David  son  of  Geoffry,  who    . 
the  house  of  Matilda  de    .     .     .'* 

'  See  No.  285,  where  the  amount  Is  put  at  4.f.  50. 
'  Struck  out. 

*  There  is  here  a  marginal  note — *'  To  the  Exchequer**—**  ad scaccaty 


100 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


The  Prior  of  Bath,  his  fine  for  trans- 
gression. 

Geoffry  de  Sulygny,  for  his  false  claim... 

Ralph  le  Tort,  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Robert  son  of  William. 

Jordan  Rudel,  for  his  false  claim  against 
William  Paynel.     He  has  nothing.^ 

William  de  Baketripe  as  pledge  for 
Jordan  Rendel. 

The  Abbot  of  Bordel,  for  disseisin 


I  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 


Half  a  mark. 
I  mark. 


Memb.  iid. 
Richard  de  Appelby,  for  disseisin 


William   Wallensis,  for  his   false  claim 

against  Philip  de  Sarumvill*. 
Alexander  de  Lisewis,  for  disseisin 
Stephen  de  Stafford  and  John  de  Hole- 

cumbe,  pledges  for  the  same. 
Matilda    de    Say,  for    her  false  claim 

against  Alan  Basset. 
Henry    Huse  of  Cherlecumbe,   for  his 

transgression. 
William    de   Legh,  for  his   false   claim 

against  the  Abbot  of  Glaston*. 
Robert  de  Ferrarius,  for  disseisin 
William  Malet*  de  Ho,  who  withdrew 

himself. 
John  le  Hore  and  Gervase  de  Thore,  as 

pledges  for  the  same. 
Ralph  Huse,  for  disseisin 

Robert  de  Columbariis,  for  disseisin     . . . 
Henry  de  Karevill'  of  Briweton',  for  his 
false  claim. 


loj.,  by  the  pledges 
of  William  Walens, 
and  Warin  de  la 
Lude. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

20S. 

Half  a  mark. 


Half  a  mark. 

Half     a     mark 

pledges. 
I  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 


by 


*  This  is  struck  out 

^  **  Malet"  is  struck  out ;  why,  is  not  clear. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS, 


lOI 


Ralph  Bloyou,  for  his  false  claim  against 

Peter  the  Chaplain.^ 
John  Wac,  for  disseisin 
John  Gubaud,  for  the  like* 
William  de  Eston  next  Bristoll*,  for  his 

false  claim. 

Peter  de  Trukewell*,  for  his  false  claim... 


Peter  de  Wabbecumbe,  for  disseisin  ... 
Robert  le  Ferum,  for  his  false  claim  ... 
Richard  Luvel,  who  has  not  prosecuted 

against  John  de  Boterell. 
Robert  Fichet  and   William   the   reeve 

of  Cury,  as  pledges  for  the  same. 
Richard  Tiitprest,  for  disseisin 
William  de  la  Burne,  for  disseisin 
Thomas  de  Burne  and  Nicholas  son  of 

Roger  the  cobbler,  for  the  like. 
Richard  de  Otry,  for  his  false  claim 


Fulk  de  Merik  Shepton'  Hugh,  who 
has  not  prosecuted  against  Hugh  de 
Unione. 

Hugh  de  Fonte  and  Richard  de  Bosco, 
as  pledges  for  the  same. 

Peter  Boscard',  who  withdrew  himself... 


Wales  de  Wroxhale  and  Elias  de  Por- 

tesheved,  as  pledges  for  Elias  son  of 

Adam  de  Stokes. 
Alda  Paynel,  who  has   not   prosecuted 

against  William  de  Mariscis. 
William  Cole  of  Hunespil',  as  pledge  for 

the  same. 


Half  a  mark. 

I  mark. 
I  mark. 
Half     a     mark     by 

pledge    of   Gilbert 

de  Sipton. 
Half     a      mark     by 

pledge  of  Nicholas 

Westouwe. 
Haifa  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 
I  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 
Haifa  mark. 

Half  a  mark  by 
pledge  of  John 
Seluein. 

Half  a  mark. 


Haifa  mark. 

Half  a  mark  by 
pledges  of  Roger 
Mar*  of  Sutton 
and  William  Hare 

Half  a  mark. 


Haifa  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 


'  This  entry  has  **  Cornwall "  in  the  margin. 

^  This  entry  has  *'  Lincoln  "  against  it  in  the  margin. 


102 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Robert  Blund  of  Draicote,  who  has 
not  prosecuted  against  Richard  de 
Batecumbe. 

Henry  son  of  William  de  Draicote  and 
Semanus  de  Draicote,  as  pledges  for 
the  same. 

William  de  Mariscis,  who  has  not  prose- 
cuted. 

Hugh  Tuneyre  and  Roger  Malivel,  as 
pledges  for  Adam  the  tailor. 

Robert  the  warrenner  and  William 
Quentin,  as  pledges  for  Robert  de  Efy. 

The  chattels  of  Hugh  Spiring  of  Ivel- 
cestr',  a  fugitive. 

Robert  de  Curtenay,  his  fine  for  his  trans- 
gression. 

Gilbert  Travers  and  Alexander  the 
fisherman,  as  pledges  for  Richard 
Swift. 

The  chattels  of  Gilbert  Odde,  hanged  . . . 

The  chattels  of  Robert  Gulie,  hanged  ... 

384.  The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the 

chattels  of  R.  Pudding,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  William  Fugel,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  Philip  the  shepherd. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  Walter  Red,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  Reginald  de  Kington*,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  Adam  Walurick',  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  William  Wreye,who  has  abjured  the 

realm. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels 

of  Godfrey  Kack'  of  Heleford,  a  fugi- 
tive. 


Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

I2d,  yd.,  [for  which] 

the  sheriff,  etc. 
6  marks. 

Half  a  mark. 

i8j.,    for    which    the 

sheriff,  etc. 
js.  6d.y  for  which  the 

sheriff,  etc. 

\2d. 
lod, 

ys.  Sd. 

I  OS. 

gs,  6a. 
1 2d. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  IO3 

The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     4^.  7^. 

of    Hugh  the   broker  {le    Saker)   of 

Axewoky,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     js,  2d. 

of  Hugh  de  Pathel*  of  Kamel,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     I2\d. 

of   Thomas    le    Friker    of    Holewal, 

hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     \6s. 

of  Roger  de  Clanefeld,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     \2d. 

of  Nicholas  the  Frenchman  of  Berton, 

a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     \6s, 

of  Godfrey  le  Due  of  Clopton  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     6s.  %d. 

of     Herbert     Drail'    of     Middelton, 

hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     3^. 

of    Robert  the   miller   of   Middelton, 

who  has  abjured  the  realm. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     41  j.  \od. 

of  William  Heredes  and  Thomas  his 

son  of  Septon,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     i  mark. 

of  Simon  de  Sytherugg*,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     4^. 

of  Hugh  Swere,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     2s.  4^/. 

of  Philip  le  Spaulder,  hanged. 
The  sherif?'[must  answer]  for  the  chattels     lojs,  \o\d, 

of  a  man  of  Janford,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     ^s.  6d. 

of     Goscelin     Hukkcl     of     Neuton', 

hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     2  \s. 

of  William  de  Huppehull'  of  Humber , 

a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     6s.  ^d. 

of  William  Stonman  of   Nonedhame, 

a  fugitive. 


I04  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     5^. 

of  Geoffry  le   Drak'  of  Menedun*,  a 

fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     ys,  id, 

of  Yvon  de  Wynemeresham,  a  fugi- 
tive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     6s. 

of  John  de  Here  of  Radehiwys,  who 

has  abjured  the  realm. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     Si". 

of  Henry  de  Buleworth,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     2gs,  6d. 

of  William  Seunk'  of  Tanton*,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     /^, 

of  Felic*  de  Tanton*,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     i6s, 

of  Gilbert  Hodde,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     1 5  j.  4^. 

of  Robert  de  Insula,  hanged. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     6s. 

of    Randal    Raft    of    Kurimalett,    a 

fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  chattels     i  \s. 

of  Adam  de  Axe,  a  fugitive. 
The  sheriff  [must  answer]  for  the  land  of     los.  per  annum 

Warin  of  the  city  of  Bath. 

Meinb.  12. 

385.  Inquest  made  in  the  county  of  Somerset  concerning 
the  chattels  of  fugitives  and  persons  hanged,  by  the  coroners  and 
by  four  knights  chosen  for  the  purpose. 

The  city  of  Bath  says  concerning  Robert  the  little  (j>arvo\  who 
killed  his  wife,  that  he  had  no  chattels,  but  [that  he  had]  a  rent 
worth  by  the  year  ioj.,  and  they  are  in  the  hand  of  our  lord  the 
King. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  R.  Pudding,  who  was  hanged,  [are 
worth]  A/i.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Harecliv'  says  that  the  chattels  of  William 
Fuel,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  2s.  6d.  iSd.  are  put  in  the  summons. 
1 2d.  [more]  ought  to  be  put. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  105 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Philip  the  shepherd,  a  fugitive, 
[are  worth]  22d,  I2d.  are  put  in  the  summons.  \od.  [more] 
ought  to  be  put 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Walter  Red,  who  was  hanged,  [are 
worth]  3J.     The  amount  is  not  charged. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Reginald  de  Kynton*,  who  was 
hanged,  [are  worth]  js,  Sd,     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Adam  Wulurisk',  who  was  hanged, 
[are  worth]  los.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  William  Nourehybourn,  who  was  hanged,  had 
no  chattels. 

The  hundred  of  Banewell*  says  that  the  chattels  of  William 
Wrehye,  who  abjured  the  English  land  for  the  death  of  William 
le  Hoyselm,  [are  worth]  9.^.  6d. 

The  hundred  of  Wytheleya  says  that  the  chattels  of  God- 
frey Cacch'  of  Holeford',  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  12^.  [The 
amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  Richard  Ruffus  of  Budekel  and  Robert  Tropynel 
of  Sapewyk*,  fugitives,  had  no  chattels. 

The  hundred  of  Kynemeresdun  says  that  the  chattels  of 
Hugh  the  broker  of  Axewyk',  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  4s,  Sd,  [The 
amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Sumerton  says  that  the  chattels  of  Hugh  de 
Pathel  of  Kamel,  who  was  hanged,  [are  worth]  ys.  2d.  [The 
amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  La  Horethum'  says  that  the  chattels  of 
William  Penning,  a  fugitive  of  Kamel,  [are  worth]  iSs.  id.  [The 
amount]  is  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Thomas  le  Friker  of  Holewal, 
who  was  hanged,  are  worth  32^^/.  [The  amount]  is  not 
[chained]. 

The  hundred  of  Cattheshay  says  that  the  chattels  of  Roger 
de  Clanesfeld*,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  16s.  [The  amount]  is  not 
[charged.] 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Nicholas  le  Franceis  of  Berton, 
a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  I2d.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Breuton  says  that  Robert  le  Pubeler*  of 
Breuton,  a  fugitive,  had  no  chattels. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Godfrey  le  Due  of  Clopton,  who 
was  hanged,  [are  worth]  i6s,     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Herbert  Drayl  of  Middelton', 

P 


Heredes  and  Thomas  his  son,  ■ 
[are  \\'orth]  41s.  lorf.     [The  amoii. 

The  hundred  of  Cruk'  says 
Sytherugg',  who  was  hanged, 
amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Gt 
worth  4J'.     [The  amount]  is  [chai) 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Ral 
a  fugitive,  [arc  worth]  10s.     [The; 

The  hundred  of  La  Stane  33 
Swcr,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  hal 
[charged],  but  he  had  4//.  more. 

It  [says]  that  the  chattels  of 
hanged,  are  worth  2s.  4^.     [The  a 

The  hundred  of  Melverton'  s 
men  of  Sanford,  who  were  hanged 
amount]  is  not  [chained]. 

The  hundred  of  Northpereto 
Goscelin  Hugbel  of  Neuton',  w 
5J.  6d.     [The  amount]  is  not  [chai 

It  says  that  Richard  Goky,  whi 

The  hundred  of  VVyleton'  says 
Huppchull'  of  Hunybcr',  a  fugi 
amount]  is  [not]  charged. 

It  says  that  William  Bcrd  o 
chattels. 

The  hundred  of  Carinctun'  saj 
Stonman  of  Menchewcd,'  a  fugiti\ 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Ge 
fugitive,  [are  worth]  Jj.     [The  am' 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of 
fugitive,  [are  worth]  ^s.  Srf,     [The 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Joh 

abjured  the  English  land  for  theft, 

MinehK 


I06  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

who  was  hanged,  [are  worth]  6s,  %d,  [The  amount]  is  not 
[charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Robert  the  miller  of  Middelton, 
who  abjured  the  English  land,  [are  worth]  4^.,  and  \2d.  are  put 
in  the  summons,  and  3^.  [more]  are  to  be  put  [therein]. 

The  hundred  of  Nortun  says  that  the  chattels  of  William 
Heredes  and  Thomas  his  son,  of  Septon',  who  were  hanged, 
[are  worth]  41J.  lod.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Cruk'  says  that  the  chattels  of  Simon 
Sytherugg',  who  was  hanged,  [are  worth]  i  mark.  [The 
amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Geoffry  the  tailor,  a  fugitive,  are 
worth  4r.     [The  amount]  is  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Ralph  son  of  Hubert  de  la  Taill, 
a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  los,     [The  amount]  is  [chained]. 

The  hundred  of  La  Stane  says  that  the  chattels  of  Hugh 
Swer,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  half  a  mark.  [The  amount]  is 
[charged],  but  he  had  4^.  more. 

It  [says]  that  the  chattels  of  Philip  le  Spauder,  who  was 
hanged,  are  worth  2s,  4//.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Melverton'  says  that  the  chattels  of  the 
men  of  Sanford,  who  were  hanged,  [are  worth]  lOjs,  io\d,  [The 
amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Northpereton'  says  that  the  chattels  of 
Goscelin  Hugbel  of  Neuton',  who  was  hanged,  [are  worth] 
5^.  6d,     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  Richard  Goky,  who  was  hanged,  had  no  chattels. 

The  hundred  of  Wyleton*  says  that  the  chattels  of  William 
Huppehuir  of  Hunyber',  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  21s,  [The 
amount]  is  [not]  charged. 

it  says  that  William  Berd  of  Radinctun,  who  fled,  had  no 
chattels. 

The  hundred  of  Carinctun'  says  that  the  chattels  of  William 
Stonman  of  Menchewed/  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  5^.  ^d. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Geoffry  le  Drak*  of  Menedun',  a 
fugitive,  [are  worth]  5^.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Yvon  de  Wynemoresham,  a 
fugitive,  [are  worth]  js.  Zd.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  John  le  Here  of  Radehywis,  who 
abjured  the  English  land  for  theft,  [are  worth]  dr. 

Minehead. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  I07 

The  free  manor  of  Haweckrig*,  who  fled,  had  no  chattels.^ 

The  free  manor  of  Exton'  says  that  the  chattels  of  Henry  do 
Bulewurth,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  8^. 

It  says  that  Omerus,  who  fled,  had  no  chattels. 

The  hundred  of  Tanton'  says  that  the  chattels  of  William 
Budde,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  lOi*.     [The  amount]  is  [charged]. 

It  says  that  John  de  Lega,  who  fled,  had  no  chattels,  but  his 
land — to  wit,  half  a  virgate — is  in  the  King  s  hand. 

It  says  that  Reginald  his  brother,  who  fled,  had  .no  chattels  ; 
but  his  land — to  wit,  one  ferling — is  in  the  King's  hand. 

The  hundred  of  Tanton'  within  says  that  the  chattels  of 
William  Schund  of  Tanton',  who  was  hanged,  [are  worth]  20s. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Felicia  de  Tanton*,  a  fugitive, 
[are  worth]  4s,    [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Northcury  says  that  the  chattels  of  Gilbert 
Hodde,  who  was  hanged,  [are  worth]  34$*.  And  [he  has  land]. 
iSs,  [are  put  in  the  summons],  and  there  remains  to  be  put  16s, 
.  .  .  The  land — half  a  virgate — is  in  the  hand  of  our  lord  the 
King,  and  it  is  worth  2s.  by  the  year.* 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Robert  Gulye,  who  was  hanged, 
[are  worth]  6s.  4d.     [The  amount]  is  [charged]. 

It  says  that  the  chattels  of  Robert  de  Insula,  who  was 
hanged,  [are  worth]  1 5^".  4cf.     [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

The  hundred  of  Abbeding  says  that  the  chattels  of  Randal 
Bast  of  Curymalet,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  6s, 

The  hundred  of  Mertoc  says  that  the  chattels  of  Adam  de 
Axe,  a  fugitive,  [are  worth]  lOi*.    [The  amount]  is  not  [charged]. 

Total  24//.  ^s,  gd. 

Memb.  I2d, 

386.  Be  it  remembered  that  Edward  Balch  of  the  hundred 
of  Chyu,  who  fled  and  came  back  again,  has  found  pledges. 

387.  Thomas  Begwin  of  Cadicot',  in  the  like  manner,  has 
found  pledges. 

388.  Adam  the  palmer  {le  Paumer)  of  Cherleton*  Mucegros, 
who  fled,  has  found  pledges. 

389.  Reginald  Gupyil,  who  was  a  fugitive,  is  in  gaol. 

^  There  b  an  obvious  omission  from  this  entry. 

'  This  entry  is  partly  illegible  ;  but  this  seems  to  be  the  sense,  and  agrees  with  the 
schedules.  "GUbert  Odde^'  figures  in  No.  383  for  i8j.,  and  "  Gilbert  Hodde  "  in 
No.  384  for  ids. — together  34J. 


I08  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


ROLL  No.  80.    (Cambridgeshire.) 

This  roll  appears  to  be  part  only  of  the  proceedings  upon  a  Cam- 
bridgeshire eyre,  and  includes  pleas  taken  in  Middlesex,  Cambridge, 
and  Huntingdon.  The  date  assigned  to  it  is  19  Henry  III.  (1234-5). 
This  appears  from  the  heading  of  Memb.  25 — ^^  Placit.  ap,  Westm.  in 
crastino  assumpcionis  Beate  Marie  anno  Regis  19."  At  the  foot  of 
Memb.  14^,  in  a  comparatively  modem  hand,  is — ^^  Pasch,  ao.  ig  If.  ^ 
ut  patet  [in/ra?]  in  pladtand^  On  Memb.  10  we  have — ^^Ass.forin, 
in  com.  Midd,  a  die  Pasc.  in  5  sept.  "  ;  on  Memb.  19^/ — "/%ir.  Forinseca 
in  crastino  Sci,  Johis.  Bapt,  ap.  Cant^\'  on  Memb.  21 — ^^  Placita  apud 
Huntingdon  in  Oct,  Sci.  Johis.  deforins.^'  It  is  confined  to  civil  business. 
From  the  forinsec  pleas  all  relating  to  the  county  of  Somerset  have 
been*  extracted. 

Memb,  11. 

390.  A  day  is  given  to  Robert  de  Bello  Campo,  plaintiff,  by 
Alexander  Huscort  his  attorney,  on  a  plea  of  warranty  of 
charter  on  the  quindene  of  Trinity  at  Cambridge  on  the  prayer 
of  the  parties. 

Memb.  i6a\ 

391.  John  de  Tudeham  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Hugh  de  Vyvun  on  a  plea  why  he  [Hugh]  did  not 
permit  him  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of  Liminton' 
which  is  vacant,  etc.,  and  Hugh  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  he  was 
summoned,  etc.  Judgment :  Attach  him  to  be  at  Huntingdon 
on  the  quindene  of  St.  John  the  Baptist. 

Memb.  I'jd. 

392.  Hugh  son  of  Ranulf,  essoiner  of  Roger  de  WynbVill, 
offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Stephen  de  Kynemerden 
on  a  plea  why  he  brought  his  suit  in  court  christian  concerning 
chattels  which  were  not,  etc.,  contrary  to,  etc.^  And  Stephen  did 
not  come.  The  sheriff  was  ordered  to  attach  him,  and  he  did 
nothing   therein,  but    reported    that   they  were  {sic)  with  the 


*  The  cause  of  complaint  here  was  that  a  suit  had  been  brought  in  the  ecclesi- 
astical court,  which  claimed  jurisdiction  over  testamentary  disposition  of  personal 
chattels,  conirary  to  the  prohibition  of  the  King. 


f 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  lOQ 


Hospitallers  of  Jerusalem,  where  he  could  not  put  his  hand. 
Therefore  let  him  [Stephen]  be  attached  as  before,  that  he  be  at 
AVestminster  on  the  morrow  of  All  Souls,  and  let  the  sheriff  [be 
there]  to  hear  his  judgment,  etc. 

Mevib,  22. 

393.  John  de  Tudeham  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  on  a  plea  that  he  should  permit 
him  [John]  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of  Lunenton', 
which  is  vacant  and  in  his  gift  as  he  says.  And  Ralph  [did 
not]  come,  etc.,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  The  sheriff  was 
ordered  that  he  should  attach  him,  and  he  did  nothing  therein. 
Therefore  let  him  [Ralph]  be  attached  as  before,  that  he  be  at 
Westminster  on  the  morrow  of  All  Souls. 

Memb.  23. 

394.  The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  diligently 
inquire  who  were  the  jurors  upon  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
taken  before  Richard  dc  Lexinton'  and  his  companions  justices 
in  eyre  at  Dorcestre  between  John  de  la  Stokk*,  querunt,  and 
Christiana  daughter  of  Robert,  and  Agnes  daughter  of  P.  de 
Wrington,  deforciants  of  a  tenement  in  Sunderlande  :  And  that, 
taking  with  him  the  said  jurors,  he  should  himself  go  to  Sunder- 
land and  by  their  oath  diligently  inquire  whether  the  half 
virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Sunderland,  which  John 
de  Sunderland  complains  that  John  dc  la  Stokke  occupied 
(pccupavii)  on  the  happening  of  the  said  assize,  was  the  same 
land  which  was  recognised  by  the  same  assize,  or  whether  the 
said  John  de  Sunderland  held  that  half  virgate  of  land  in  his 
demesne  when  the  aforesaid  assize  was  taken  or  not :  And  that 
he  should  return  the  inquisition  to  the  justices  in  eyre  at 
Cambridge  in  three  weeks  from  Trinity,  on  which  day  John 
de  la  Stokke  essoined  himself,  and  he  had  a  day  by  his  essoin, 
on  the  quindene  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  on  which  day  he  did 
not  come.*  The  sheriff  has  sent  the  inquisition,  which  says  that 
John  de  Sunderland  held  the  half  virgate  of  land  in  his  demesne 
when  the  aforesaid  assize  was  taken,  rendering  therefor  3^.,  and 

*  In  A,D.   1235,  "three  weeks  after  Trinity"  fell  on  the  24th  June,  and  the 
quindene  of  St.  John  was  on  the  8th  July. 


no  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

that  the  jurors  only  gave  to  the  said  John  de  la  Stokke  the 
aforesaid  3^.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  John  de  Sunder- 
land should  have  his  seisin  again  of  the  aforesaid  half  virgate 
of  land,  saving  to  John  de  la  Stokke  the  aforesaid  3^. 


ROLL   No.  775.    (Hampshire.) 

This  is  a  roll  of  25  membranes,  containing  both  civil  pleas  and 
pleas  of  the  crown.  It  bears  the  date  20  Hen.  III.,  a.d.  1235-6. 
Memb.  25  contains  essoins  which  are  stated  to  have  been  taken  at 
Winton'  on  Monday  the  morrow  of  the  Epiphany  in  the  20th  year. 

Metnb.  i. 

Pleas  and  assizes  before  W.  de  Eboraco  and  his  companions 
at  Winton'  in  the  20th  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of 
King  John. 

Memb.  7. 

394^.  W.  de  Ral[eigh]  and  his  companions  have  notified  the 
justices  by  their  writ  that  Katharine,  the  wife  of  Michael  son  of 
Ralph,  has  put  in  her  place  Nicholas  de  Heghton,  or  Walter  de 
Neuton,  against  William  de  Monte  Acuto  on  a  plea  of  warranty 
of  dower  which  Lucy  de  Monte  Acuto  seeks  against  the  same 
William.^ 


ROLL   174.    (Devonshire.) 

The  title  on  Memb.  i  gives  the  date  of  this  roll  as  the  summer  of 
A.D.  1238,  22  Henry  III.  It  comprises  forty-three  membranes,  and 
contains  no  pleas  of  the  crown.  On  Memb.  22  we  have  an  indication 
of  the  justices*  intention  to  be  at  Ilchester  on  the  22nd  July  following. 
On  Memb.  43  are  pleas  taken  there. 

^  In  the  margin  are  **  Sussex,  Somerset  and  Northampton,"  being  the  counties 
in  which  presumably  the  lands  in  question  lay.  Sometimes  the  name  of  a  county  in 
the  margin  indicated  the  place  of  service  of  a  party,  such  as  a  warrantor. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  Ill 


Memb.  i. 

Elssoins  de  malo  veniendi^  taken  at  Exeter  on  Thursday  next 
before  the  feast  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  before  W.  de  Eboraco 
and  his  companions  itinerant  in  the  county  of  Devon  in  the 
twenty-second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  John. 

Essoins  taken  at  Exeter  on  the  morrow  of  St.  John  the  Baptist. 

394^.  William  de  Bere,  the  attorney  of  John  de  Aure,  against 
John  Ruffus  of  Lamihet,  on  a  plea  of  land,  whereon  the  grand 
assize  [was  claimed]  by  William  Russel  on  Saturday  next  after 
the  quindene  of  St.  John  the  Baptist.^  He  has  pledged  his 
faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Agnes,  wife  of  the  aforesaid 
John  de  Aure,  by  her  attorney  in  banco.  And  the  twelve 
knights  did  not  come.  Therefore  the  sheriff,  who  was  present, 
was  ordered  that  he  should  then  have  the  bodies  of  all,  etc. 

Essoins   taken   at   Exeter  on   the   quindene  of  St.   John   the 
Baptist. 

394r.  Lucy  Malet  against  Richard  de  Cumb'  and  Elaria  his 
wife,  and  Hugh  Peverel  and  Isabella  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of 
portions,  by  Gilbert  de  Knappe.  In  one  month  from  St.  John 
Baptist's  day  at  Ivelcestr*.     She  has  pledged  her  faith.^ 

Essoins  at  Exeter  on  Thursday  next  before  the  festival  of  St. 
Mary  Magdalene. 

394^/.  Robert  de  Mandevill',  whom  Roger  de  Acast'  vouches 
to  warranty  against  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  on  a  plea  of  assize  of 
mort  [d'ancestor],  by  Robert  de  Taillor.  On  the  next  coming 
of  the  justices,  by  pledge  of  William  de  Bosco  of  Haub'ton'. 
And  W  .  .  .  de  Bathon  the  Sheriff  has  the  writ. 

394^.  The  Master  of  the  Hospital  of  St  John  of  Bristoll' 
against  John  Bretesch',  on  a  plea  that  he  should  permit  him  to 
have  pasture  by  Ralph  de  Coteswald*.  On  the  quindene  of  St. 
Michael  at  Westminster.  And  John  puts  in  his  place  Hugh  de 
Uunestere,  clerk.'* 


*  In  the  margin  is  "  ve  t"  i.e.,  veniius  est.     See  further  as  to  this  case  No.  394^^ 
and  Nc.  594^. 

*  In  the  margin  is  **  /w  t »''  i-e.,  »^w  est.     See  further  as  to  this  case  No.  394^. 
'  "  n^t"  in  the  margin. 


112  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Memb,  2. 

Picas  and  assizes  at  Exeter  in  the  county  of  Devon  before 
William  de  Eboraco  and  his  companions,  justices  itinerant  for 
all  picas,  on  Thursday  next  before  the  feast  of  St  John  Baptist, 
in  the  twenty-second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of 
King  John. 

Memb,  22. 

394/  The  grand  assize  between  John  de  Lanyyette,  claim- 
ant, and  John  de  Aure  and  Agnes  his  wife,  tenants,  of  half  a 
virgatc  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Wandest',  is  put  in 
respite  until  Thursday  the  feast  of  St  Mary  Magdalene  at 
Ivclccstr'  for  the  want  of  knights,  of  whom  only  eight  came  on 
the  day,  etc     Let  the  sheriff  have  the  bodies  of  the  others,  etc 

Memb,  43. 

Pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Ivelcestr*  before  W.  de  Eboraco  and 
his  companions  in  the  twenty-second  year  of  the  reign  of 
the  King. 

394^*-.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Roger  de 
Montfriard,  Thomas  de  G>Ties,  Hugh  de  Columbers,  Thomas  le 
Marcscal,  and  Hugh  de  Dereberg',  unjustly,  etc,  disseised  Peter 
de  Tukeswell  of  his  free  tenement  in  Tukeswell,  since  the  first 
coronation,  etc,  and  neither  Roger,  nor  any  one  of  the  otheis, 
comes,  nor  were  they  attached,  because  they  were  not  foond. 
Therefore  let  the  assize  be  taken  against  them  by  default  The 
jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Peter  put  in  his  view  {fosmit  im  vtsm 
SMi>)  fifteen  acres  of  land  which,  by  reason  of  a  certain  covenant 
made  between  him  and  Henr>-  his  father,  the  same  Henr>-  ought 
to  hold  for  his  life  for  his  support;  and  whereas  Henr\-  held  that 
land  for  some  time,  he  ga\*e  it  soon  after  to  Roger  de  Monfiriard' 
iis  a  marriage  g^ift  with  a  certain  dai^hter  of  his,  wherefore  tbcy 
say  that  the  said  Henrj*  disseised  him  [Peter].  And  because  it 
is  manifest  that  Henrw  the  father  of  Peter,  disseised  him  of  the 
said  land,  and  not  the  aforesaid  Roger,  it  is  considered  that 
Peter  should  take  nothing  bv  that  assize,  and  should  be  in 
mercy  for  his  false  claim.  He  may  procure  a  writ  of  entij- 
against  Roger  it  he  wishes.     All  the  jurors  of  the  same  assze 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  II3 

are  in  mercy  for  their  false  statement,*  to  wit,  William  Pilloc, 
Peter  de  Bere,  and  their  companions.  Let  them  be  in  custody. 
Afterwards  they  made  fine  for  40J.,  by  pledge  of  John  de 
Reingni,  and  Ralph  son  of  Bernard.  Peter's  amercement  is 
pardoned  by  the  justices. 

394A.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  le 
Bigot  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  the  Abbot  of  Cirencestr*  of  his 
common  of  pasture,  in  Marston,  which  appertains  to  his  free 
tenement  in  Frome,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  Robert  de 
Merland,  Hugh  Tunerre,  Robert  de  Watelegh',  and  Robert  de 
Mele,  recognitors  of  the  same  assize,  did  not  come.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy.  The  jurors  say  that  the  Abbot  put  in  his 
view  {posuit  in  visu  sud)  a  certain  pasture  which  is  called  le 
Mareis,  and  a  certain  other  pasture  between  Appedhuir  and 
Thigkethorn*,  concerning  which  they  say  that  the  said  Richard 
.disseised  him  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  le  Mareis,  as  the  writ 
says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  Abbot  should  recover 
his  seisin  by  view  of  the  recognitors.  Richard  is  in  mercy,  by 
pledge  of  William  le  Butelier  and  William  de  Hardington. 
They  say  also  concerning  the  common  of  pasture  between 
Appedhuir  and  Thikkethorn,  that  he  [Richard]  did  not  disseise 
him  as  the  writ  says,  because  he  was  never  in  seisin  thereof 
within  the  time  aforesaid.*  Therefore  Richard,  as  to  this  [may 
go]  without  a  day,  and  the  Abbot  is  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of 
Robert  de  Blakeford'  and  William  Branche.  xAfterwards  the 
Abbot  came  and  made  fine  for  5  marks,  by  pledge  of  the  same, 
and  Richard  \Qs.  by  the  pledges  above-mentioned.  Damages, 
\  mark. 

394/'.  The  assize  of  novel  disseisin  which  Thomas  de 
Hauteviir  arraigned  against  William  Malreward*,  John  Maire- 
ward',  and  many  others  named  in  the  writ,  touching  his 
common  of  pasture  in  Norton'  Malreward*,  which  appertains  to 
his  free  tenement  in  Norton  Hautevill',  remains  without  a  day 
because  William  Malreward',  who  was  the  principal  disseisor, 
has  died. 

394/*.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Walter  Eskel- 
ling,  Thomas  Mautravers,  Robert  de  Holewall*,  Henry  le  Mar- 
escal,  Richard  Hicheman,  and  Luke  de  la  Bare  unjustly,  etc., 
disseised  Osbert  Giffard  of  his   free   tenement   in    Hakkeford' 

'  What  this  was  does  not  appear. 
'  That  is,  of  limitation. 


114  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

Eskeling',  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  Walter  Eskeling'  and 
Henry  le  Marscal  come  and  allege  nothing  wherefor  the  assize 
should  remain.  Thomas  Maltravers,  Robert  de  Holewall, 
Richard  Hicheman,  and  Luke  de  la  Barr  do  not  come,  and  they 
were  attached  by  the  aforesaid  Walter.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy.  Let  the  assize  be  taken  by  default.  William  de 
Nutsford,  Gregory  de  Lacerton,  and  John  de  Esse,  recog- 
nitors of  the  same  assize,  have  not  come.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy.  After^\'ards  Walter  came  and  confessed  that,  after  the 
death  of  Osbert  Giffard,  father  of  the  aforesaid  Osbert,  he 
carried  off  hay  from  a  certain  park,  touching  which  this  assize  is 
arraigned,  which  contains  about  27  acres,  because  he  believed 
that  he  had  the  custody  thereof  after  the  death  of  the  said 
Osbert.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  he  disseised  him 
[Osbert].  Therefore  let  Osbert  have  his  seisin  by  view  of  the 
recognitors,  and  Walter  is  in  mercy.  Let  an  inquiry  as  to 
damages  be  made  by  the  recognitors,  who  say  that  the  total  ot 
the  damages  is  50^.  Afterwards  Walter  came  and  found 
pledges,  Nicholas  de  Molis,  William  de  Paris,  Richard  Muce- 
gros,  and  Robert  de  Turbervill.  Pledges  of  Henry  Marescall, 
Walter  Eskelling  and  Richard  Mucegros.  Afterwards  Walter 
came  and  made  fine  for  lOOJ.,  by  the  pledges  aforesaid. 
Damages,  50^.* 

394>^.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Gerald  de 
Coker  and  Matilda  his  mother,  Robert  de  Winterbum*,  William 
de  Coker,  and  William  de  Funtel,  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Isabella, 
daughter  of  John  Seynnoc,  of  her  free  tenement  in  Wrthile, 
since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  Gerald  and  the  others,  except 
Matilda,  come  and  allege  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should 
remain.  The  jurors  say  that  Gerald  and  all  the  others  dis- 
seised her,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Isabella  should  recover  her  seisin  by  view  of  the  recognitors, 
and  Gerald  and  all  the  others  are  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of 
Richard  de  Langeford,  then  sheriff.     Damages,  2s, 

394/.  The  jury  {^juratd)  of  twenty- four,  to  convict  twelve,' 
comes  to  recognise  by  Michael  de  Berton,  Adam  le  Waleis, 
William  son  of  Arthur,  Laurence  de  Sancto  Mauro,  Pharamond 

^  In  the  margin  arc  the  county  names,  Somerset  and  Dorset.  But  the  land, 
Ockford  Shilling,  is  in  Dorset. 

*  As  to  this  procedure,  sec  note  to  No.  487.  The  roll  only  names  twenty-two 
j  urors. 


f 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  II5 

de  Bononia,  William  de  Dicmere,  William  le  Daneis,  Henry  le 
Vikers,  Geoffry  de  Eston,  Robert  de  Menigne,  William  de 
Welwenton',  Robert  de  Coker,  William  de  Coker,  William  de 
Draicote,  Robert  de  Eston,  Roger  de  Langeford,  Savaric  de 
Cinnoc,  Gilbert  le  Daneis,  William  Maleherbe,  Matthew  de  Clive- 
don,  Robert  de  Claviir,  and  Robert  de  Blakeford,  whether 
Emisius  de  Dunhevid  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  the  Abbot  of 
Glaston  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Dunhevid,  which  apper- 
tains to  his  free  tenement  in  Melnes,  since  the  first  crossing, 
etc.  who  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  aforesaid  Ernisius  did 
disseise  the  Abbot,  as  the  writ  says,  because,  they  say,  that  the 
Abbot  always  had  common  of  pasture  in  Dunhevid,  as  appur- 
tenant to  his  free  tenement  in  Melnes,  except  a  certain  close, 
called  Hundehevid,  with  the  appurtenances.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  the  jurors  of  the  said  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
have  well  sworn.  Therefore  let  them  be  quit,  and  let  the  Abbot 
have  his  seisin  by  view  of  the  recognitors.  Let  Emisius  be 
committed  to  gaol.  Afterwards  Ernisius  came  and  made  fine 
for  20  marks  by  pledge  of  William  Branche,  John  de  Peanton', 
Henry  de  Stanwell,  Ba  .  .  .  dc  Emnebergh,  William  Haket, 
Walter  de  Wike,  William  de  Paris,  and  Nicholas  de  Liteltun. 

394;;/.  Robert  de  Curtenai,  who  brought  a  writ  of  novel 
disseisin  against  John  Briuwar  touching  a  free  tenement  in 
Cruk',  and  ...  an  assize  against  him  and  others  concern- 
ing a  certain  dyke  in  the  same,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  William  the  goldsmith, 
Algar  de  Cruk*,  Robert  de  Claviir,  and  Adam  de  Gyaines. 

394«.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  le 
Gant  unjustly,  etc.,  raised  a  certain  dam  in  Wer'  to  the  injury 
of  the  free  tenement  of  William  son  of  Walter  de  Cedre  in 
Cedre,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  Henry  comes  and  alleges 
nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  Simon  de 
Berghes,  Henry  de  Bigesand,  and  Robert  de  Gatemor',  recog- 
nitors of  the  same  assize,  did  not  come.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  The  jurors  say  that  Henry  did  raise  the  dam,  as  the 
writ  says.  Therefore  let  it  be  thrown  down  by  view  of  the 
recognitors,  and  Henry  is  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of  William 
de  Poelet  and  Robert  his  brother.     Damages,  2s. 


Il6  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb.  43^/! 

394^.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Meifill,  Robert  de  le  Stane,  William  Portebref,  Peter  RufTus, 
Henry  de  Cherlton',  and  Robert  le  Marescal,  unjustly,  etc, 
disseised  the  Prior  and  convent  of  Breuton,  etc.  Afterwards 
the  Prior  came  and  sought  leave  to  withdraw  his  writ,  and  he 
had  leave. 

394^.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  de  Aure, 
William  the  clerk,  and  John  de  la  Wiche,  unjustly,  etc,  dis- 
seised John  Ruffus  of  Lamiette  of  his  common  of  pasture  in 
Wandestr',  which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same 
vill,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  William  the  clerk  and  John  do 
not  come.  They  were  not  attached,  because  they  were  not 
found.  John  de  Aure,  who  comes,  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the 
assize  should  remain.  Geoffry  de  Lawerton,  William  de  Raden\ 
Maurice  de  Boclande,  and  Robert  Malherbe,  recognitors  of  the 
same  assize,  do  not  come.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  John 
de  Aire  [says]  that  John  Ruffus  holds  of  him  half  a  virgate  of 
land  in  Wandestr',  that  he  has  sufficient  pasture  for  the  whole 
of  his  tenement,  and  that  it  was  provided  by  the  Council  of  our 
lord  the  King  and  the  magnates  of  England  that  a  lord  might 
do  with  his  land  what  suited  him,  saving  sufficient  pasture  for 
his  tenants,  according  to  their  tenements.  Therefore  it  seems 
to  him  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  proceed.  John  Ruffus  says 
that  John  [de  Aure]  so  closed  against  him  the  way  to  his 
common  of  pasture  that  he  could  not  have  free  ingress  thereto. 
Afterwards  John  de  Lamiete  came  and  withdrew  himself  by 
leave,  and  John  de  Aure  granted  to  John  de  Lamiette  common 
of  pasture  for  the  whole  of  the  tenement  which  he  holds  in  the 
same  vill,  with  free  ingress  and  egress.  The  same  John  de 
Lamiette  seeks  against  John  de  Aure  half  a  virgate  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Wandestre,  whereon  the  grand  assize, 
etc.  [was  claimed].  John  de  Aire  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  by  pledge  of  John  de  Reinni.  A  day  is  given  them  to 
take  the  chirograph  at  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of  St 
Michael.  John  de  Aire  puts  in  his  place  William  de  Here  to 
take  his  chirograph.^ 

*  See  further  as  to  this,  cases  Nos.  394^  and  394/1     The  particulars  of  the  fine  are 
to  be  found  in  "  .Somerset  Fines,"  p.  104,  No.  24. 


f 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  II7 

394^.  Richard  de  Cumbe  and  Hillaria  his  wife,  and  Hugh 
Peverel  and  Isabella  his  wife,  by  the  attorneys  of  Hillaria  and 
Isabella,  seek  against  Lucy  Malet  two  parts  of  the  manor  of 
Widecumbe,  with  the  appurtenances,  as  the  right  of  Hillaria 
and  Isabella.  Lucy  comes  and  seeks  a  view.  Let  her  have  it. 
A  day  is  given  them  at  Westminster  on  the  morrow  of  All 
Souls.  And  in  the  meantime,  etc.  [let  the  view  be  made].  And 
Hugh  Peverel  puts  in  his  place  William  son  of  Ralph.^ 

394r.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de 
Ceme,  Nicholas  Balistarius,  John  de  Filesham,  and  Hugh  his 
brother,  Adam  le  Jovene,  and  Robert  son  of  Edwin  unjustly,  etc., 
disseised  Robert  de  Bruwes  of  his  free  tenement  in  Stapl*  since 
the  first  crossing,  etc.  No  disseisor  comes,  and  the  sheriff  could 
not  attach  them  because  they  were  of  the  liberty  of  the  Bishop 
of  Winton.  Therefore  let  the  assize  proceed  against  them  by 
default.  Ralph  de  Munsorcl,  John  Ostriciarius,  Thomas  le 
Keel,  Gilbert  de  Torne,  and  Robert  de  Valle,  recognitors  of  the 
same  assize,  have  not  come ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  Be 
it  known  that  Robert  de  Briuwes  does  not  come,  but  Hugh  de 
Stanton'  comes  for  him,  and  is  his  attorney  by  writ  of  our  lord 
the  King,  etc.  The  jurors  say  that  Henry  and  the  others  did 
disseise  Robert,  as  the  writ  says,  and  that  villeins  of  the  Bishop  of 
Winton',  who  is  dead,  hold  the  tenement  concerning  which  this 
assize  is  arraigned.  A  day  is  given  them  before  our  lord  the 
King  to  hear  their  judgment,  and  they  are  told  that  they  should 
follow  W.  de  Ebor*  so  that  they  may  be  before  our  lord  the 
King,  when  he  shall  be  there.     Damages,  ^  mark. 


ROLL  No.  1 174.    (Divers  Counties.) 

This  is  a  colleclion  of  four  membranes  made  up  of  ten  separate 
fragments,  in  various  handwritings,  stitched  together.  The  heading  of 
Memb.  i  cannot  be  relied  upon  with  any  certainty  to  belong  to  any- 
thing more  than  the  particular  fragment  of  parchment  upon  which  it  is 
written.  The  roll  is  probably  made  up  from  the  survivals  of  several 
other  rolls  of  about  the  same  period. 


'  See  ante.  No.  394^. 


Il8  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb,  i. 

Assizes  of  novel  disseisin  taken  before  Henry  de  Bathon', 
Gilbert  de  Preston*,  Geoffry  de  Ermenteriis,  and  Walter  de 
Deneford',  on  Sunday  next  after  the  feast  of  All  Saints  at 
Clopton'  in  the  25th  year  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb.  3. 

395.  The  assize  of  last  presentation  to  be  taken  at  Tanton'  on 
the  morrow  of  the  Sunday  after  Easter  in  the  24th  year  of  King 
Henry  son  of  King  John,  which  John  de  Arundel  arraigned 
against  the  Prior  of  Leg*  by  the  precept  of  our  lord  the  King* 
upon  the  last  presentation  to  the  church  of  Samford  Arundel 
before  Sir  Reginald  de  Moyn,  Richard  de  Wroteham,  William 
Malet,  and  Hamelin  de  Dandon,  justices  constituted  for  this 
purpose  by  order  of  our  lord  the  King. 

On  the  said  day  came  John  de  Arundel  and  the  Prior  of 
Lega  and  the  assize  ;  but  two  of  the  justices,  to  wit,  Reginald  de 
Moyn  and  Richard  de  Wroteham,  did  not  come,  only  William 
Malet  and  Hamelin  de  Dandon,  who  were  unwilling  to  take  the 
assize  in  the  absence  of  their  companions,  and  therefore  they 
postponed  them  [the  parties]  to  another  day,  to  wit,  to  that  day 
fortnight  {a  die  illo  in  1 5  dies). 

On  that  day  William  Malet  and  Hamelin  de  Dandon  came. 
Reginald  de  Moyn  and  Richard  de  Wroteham  did  not  come.  John 
came,  and  prayed  an  assize  against  the  Prior,  and  the  Prior 
joined.  And  John  de  Arundel  and  the  Prior  of  Leg*  came  and 
consented  and  prayed  that  those  two  justices,  William  and 
Hamelin,  should  take  the  assize,  who  had  not  then  considered  of 
this  matter,  nor  dared  [take  the  assize]  before  they  should  have 
the  counsel  of  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King.  Therefore  they 
put  them  [the  parties]  off  to  a  day.  to  wit,  the  Friday  next  after 
the  Feast  of  Trinity,  and  in  the  meanwhile  Hamelin  de  Dandon 
went  to  the  court  so  that  he  might  have  advice  whether  he  and 
William  Malet  might  take  the  assize  in  the  absence  of  their 
companions.  He  explained  to  Sir  Henry  de  Bracton  the 
absence  of  his  companions,  and  that  both  parties  agreed  and 

*  This  order  of  the  King  must  have  referred  to  the  place  of  trial,  and  not  to  the 
arraignment. 


prayed  that  he  and  William  Malct  should  take  the  assize.  Sir 
Henry  de  Bracton  advised  him  that  they  should  take  the  assize. 
On  the  Fridaynext  after  [Trinity]  VViMiam  Maletand  Hamelin 
dc  Dandon  came,  and  John  de  Arundel  and  the  Prior  of  Lega' 
prayed  the  assize,  and  agreed  that  they  two  should  take  tlie 
muc.  And  the  assize  was  brought  together  and  sufficiently 
cho.sen,  and  it  agreed.  And  it  was  inquired  by  the  justices 
whether  they  [the  parties]  knew  anything  against  the  assize.' 
And  the  Prior  came  and  said  that  the  assize  ought  not  lo  be,  or 
proceed,  because  he  had  a  charter  of  Roger  de  Arundel,  and  he 
produced  it  to  the  justices  and  ."iaid  that  the  same  Roger  gave  to 
God  and  the  canons  of  Leg'  the  church  of  Samford  to  their  own 
proper  use  in  the  time  of  Ralph  de  Hospital,  then  Prior,  and  he 
showed  the  confirmation  of  Savaric,  Bishop  of  Bath,  that  he 
should  have  that  church  to  their  own  use  after  the  death  of 
Ralph  de  Hospital,  then  Prior  of  Lude.  He  produced  the 
confirmation  of  Nicholas  de  Arundel,  son  of  Roger  de  Arundel. 
Further,  the  Prior  said  that  at  one  time  he  received  2os.  from 
the  same  church.  John  de  Arundel  came,  and  said  that  after 
the  death  of  the  aforesaid  Ralph  de  Hospital,  Roger  de  Arundel 
his  grandfather,  presented  in  the  time  of  peace  to  that  church  a 
certain  person,  by  name  William  Corbyn,  who,  upon  his  presen- 
tation, was  canonically  admitted  and  instituted  to  the  same 
church,  who  died,  and  upon  his  death  the  church  was  vacant. 
And  he  put  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  Prior  then  came, 
and  said  that  neither  Roger  de  Arundel'  nor  any  heir  of  him, 
after  the  death  of  Ralph  de  Hospital,  presented  any  person  to 
the  same  church,  neither  the  aforesaid  William  Corbyn  nor  any- 
one else,  and  therefore  he  put  himself  upon  the  assize,  and  it  was 
taken.  .  .  .  (The  jurors  said  ?]  that  Roger  de  Arundel  pre- 
sented in  the  time  of  peace  the  last  parson  who  died  to  the 
church  of  Samford  and  appointed  William  Corbyn  and  after  the 
death  of  Ralph  de  Hospital,  on  which  presentation  [William] 
was  canonically  admitted  and  instituted.  Therefore  John  de 
Arundel  should  recover  his  seisin  of  the  advowson,  and  the  Prior 
was  in  mercy. 

Memb.  ^d. 
.And  the  Prior  comes,  and  admits  that  he  agreed  that  the 
aforesaid  William  and  Hamelin  should  take  the  assize  in  the 


I20  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

absence  of  their  companions,  and  that  he  put  himself  upon  the 
assize  whether  Roger,  the  grandfather  of  John,  presented  to 
the  same  church  one  William  Corby n,  who,  on  his  presentation, 
was  admitted  to  that  church  and  instituted  after  the  charter  was 
•made  to  the  Prior.  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Roger 
presented  at  the  last  presentation  to  the  same  church,  to  wit, 
the  said  William.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William  and 
Hamelin  have  not  done  false  judgment  to  the  Prior.  Therefore 
the  Prior  is  in  mercy,  and  William  and  Hamelin  go  quit.  After- 
wards that  amercement  and  the  other  before  the  other  justices 
are  pardoned  because  the  Prior  is  poor.  Let  him  take  a  writ  of 
right  against  the  heir  if  he  wish.* 


ROLL  No.  1 176.    (Divers  Counties.) 

Although  included  in  the  calendar  amongst  the  Assize  Rolls,  this 
collection  of  twenty-seven  membranes  is  not  a  record  of  any  proceedings 
before  the  justices.  It  is  a  record  of  writs  of  the  grand  assize  extend- 
ing apparently  over  a  period  from  23  Henry  III.  (see  Memb.  25)  to 
49  Henry  III.  (see  Memb.  iSd.),  The  writs  relating  to  Somerset  only 
have  been  extracted. 


MeiPtb,  I. 

396.  Martin  de  Coker,  tenant,  puts,  etc.,'  against  William  de 
Hevenbar*,  concerning  a  fourth  part  of  one  hide  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances  in  North  Coker,  and  prays,  etc.,*  which  of  them 
have  the  greater  right  in  that  land.     Witness,  etc. 

^  In  this  case  the  Prior  was  suing  the  two  justices  who  had  previously  tried  a  plea 
of  darrein  presentment  between  John  de  Arundel  and  himself  on  the  ground  that  they 
had  wrongly  tried  the  plea  in  the  absence  of  their  two  associates,  justices  specially 
assigned  with  them  to  try  the  issue.  The  proceedings  ujx)n  the  earlier  trial  are 
first  set  out,  then  ihe  whole  case  seems  to  have  been  reheard,  whether  by  the  same 
jury  or  not  does  not  appear,  with  the  result  that  the  Prior  again  fails.  Quierc 
whether  John  had  died  m  the  meanwhile  ?  for  the  Prior  has  leave  to  take  a  writ 
of  right  against  "  the  heir,"  if  he  be  so  minded.  Or  was  John  himself  referred  to  by 
that  description  as  the  heir  of  Roger  ?  Apparently  he  did  so  wish,  for  the  quarrel 
seems  to  have  been  settled  by  a  fine  between  the  Prior  and  John  Arundell,  tenant,  in 
27  Hen.  III. :  seepos/  No.  555.  The  case  is  interesting  as  giving  Henry  de  Bracton's 
opinion  as  to  the  power  of  two  out  of  four  justices  to  try  the  case  under  the  circimi- 
stances. 

2  Puts  himself,  that  is,  upon  the  grand  assize. 

'  i.e.,  Prays  a  recognition  to  be  made. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  121 


397.  Adam  son  of  Jordan,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Walter 
son  of  Henry,  concerning  two  parts  of  half  a  virgate  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances  in  Cusinton',  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  have 
the  greater  right  to  hold  that  land  in  demesne  or  the  same 
Walter  to  hold  the  same  of  him.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb,  id, 

398.  Stephen  the  chamberlain  {camerarius)^  tenant,  puts, 
etc  against  Isolde  de  Glastonia,  concerning  half  an  acre  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Welles,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  or 
the  said  Isolde  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land,  etc.* 

Memb.  2. 

399.  Walter  le  Waleis  (  Walensis),  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against 
William  de  Welleslegh,  concerning  two  parts  of  half  a  virgate 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Churchehull,  and  prays,  etc., 
which  of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb,  4. 

400.  Roger  son  of  Avice,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Ralph  le 
Waleys,  touching  one  virgate  and  a  half  of  land  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  West  Chikerel,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  have  the 
greater  right  to  hold  that  land  of  the  aforesaid  Ralph  or  the 
same  Ralph  to  hold  it  in  demesne.     Witness,  etc. 

MefPtb,  5. 

Roll  of  the  grand  assize  for  the  26th  year. 

401.  William  de  Butecleye  and  Christiana  his  wife,  tenants, put, 
etc  against  William  de  Neuport  and  Alice  his  wife,  concerning 
one  shop  {sopa)  with  the  appurtenances  in  Glaston',  and  pray, 
etc,  whether  they  or  the  aforesaid  William  and  Alice  have  the 
greater  right  in  that  shop.     Witness,  etc. 

402.  Richard  de  Dulting'  and  Denise  his  wife,  tenants,  put, 
etc  against  Henry  le  Chedere  and  Eva  his  wife,  concerning 
three  messuages  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  suburb  (suburbia) 
of  Bristol,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  they  or  the  aforesaid  Henry 

'  A  few  entries  abore  this,  on  the  same  membrane,  we  hare  a  writ  tested  at 
Woodstock  00  the  26ch  May. 

R 


122  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


and  Eva  have  the  greater  right  in  those  messuages.     Witness, 
etc. 

Memb.  6. 
Roll  of  the  grand  assize  for  the  26th  year. 

Memb.  yd. 

403.  William  Petyt,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Robert  Wul- 
bold*,  concerning  half  a  virgatc  of  land  with  the  appurtenances 
in  Loghton*,  and  prays,  etc.,  which  of  them  have  the  greater 
right  in  that  land.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb.  lod. 

404.  Walter  de  la  Bere,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Thomas  de 
Rcyny  and  Joan  his  wife,  concerning  one  messuage,  six  acres  of 
land,  and  three  acres  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Hevccriz,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  or  the  aforesaid  Thomas 
and  Joan  have  the  greater  right  in  the  said  messuage,  land,  and 
meadow. 

Memb,  11. 

405.  Nicholas  de  Bissopeston'  and  Alice  his  wife,  tenants, 
put,  etc.  against  Richard  de  Penne,  concerning  one  messuage, 
half  a  virgate  of  land,  and  one  acre  of  meadow,  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  the  vill  de  Monte  Acuto,  and  pray.s,  etc.,  whether 
they  or  the  aforesaid  Richard  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land, 
messuage,  and  meadow.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb.  13. 

406.  Andrew  son  of  William  le  Fraunceys,  tenant,  puts, 
etc.  against  Robert  de  Cuntevill',  concerning  half  a  ferling  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Alleunarton*,  and  prays,  etc., 
which  of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb.  13^ 

407.  Richard  de  Horton'  and  Hawise  his  wife,  tenants,  put, 
etc.  against  Thomas  le  Ercedekne,  concerning  two  virgates  of 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 23 

land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Horton,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether 
they  or  the  aforesaid  Thomas  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land. 
Witness,  etc. 


Mentb,  14^. 


Roll  of  the  40th  year. 


Roll  of  the  41st  year. 


The  42nd  year. 


Metnb.  15. 


Memb.  i$d. 


Memb.  16. 
Roll  of  the  43rd  year. 

408.  Alan  de  Walton',  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Matthew  de 
Stane,  claimant,  concerning  one  virgate  of  land  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  Berton',  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  have  the  greater 
right  to  hold  that  land  in  demesne  or  the  aforesaid  Matthew  to 
hold  it  of  him.  Witness,  the  King,  at  Westminster,  the  19th 
February. 

409.  The  Master  of  the  Hospital  of  Saint  John  at  Bristol, 
deforciant,  puts,  etc.  against  John  Bretasch',  touching  the 
customs  and  services  which  the  aforesaid  John  demands  of  the 
said  Master  in  respect  of  a  tenement  which  he  [the  Master]  holds 
of  him  in  Budicumbe,  etc.,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  should  owe 
to  John  scutage  for  that  tenement  when  it  should  h.ippcn,  only, 
as  he  [the  Master]  admits,  or,  the  same  service,  and  in  addition 
the  same  suit,  to  his  [John's]  court  every  three  weeks,  as  John 
requires  of  him.     Witness,  the  King,  at  Wodest'*  the  3rd  June. 

Memb.  \6d. 
Roll  for  the  44th  year. 

Memb.  17. 
Roll  of  the  45th  year. 

*  Woodstock. 


124  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb,  i8. 
Roll  for  the  47th  year. 

Memb,  iSd, 

Of  the  48th  year. 

Writs  of  the  49th  year  of  the  King. 

Memb,  19. 

410.  Christiana,  daughter  of  Roger  de  Tracy,  tenant,  puts, 
etc.  against  William  Wering',  concerning  one  burgage  {burgagio) 
and  two  acres  and  a  half  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Chedehunt*,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  she  or  the  aforesaid  William 
have  the  greater  right  in  that  burgage  and  land.     Witness,  etc. 

411.  William  parson  of  the  church  of  Murilinch,  tenant,  puts, 
etc.  against  William  Malet,  concerning  one  messuage,  thirteen 
acres  of  land,  fifteen  perches,  and  one-third  part  of  one  perch  of 
meadow,  with  tlie  appurtenances  in  Sutton',  and  prays,  etc.,  which 
of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land,  messuage,  and 
meadow.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb,  2  id, 

412.  Gervase  son  of  Walkelin,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against 
Richard  de  Marisco,  concerning  ten  acres  of  land  and  one 
messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Hunncspill',  and  prays,  etc., 
which  of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land  and  messuage. 

Memb.  23. 

413.  John  Cusin  of  Merkestok,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against 
Hugh  de  Bruges  and  Alice  {Aleis')  de  Brugis,  concerning  half 
a  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Brugis,  and  prays, 
etc..  whether  [she]  have  the  greater  right  to  hold  that  land  of 
the  aforesaid  Hugh  and  Alice  or  they  to  hold  it  in  demesne. 

Memb,  23^. 

414.  Elias  Beelde,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Henry  the  carter 
{carcctarius)  of  Ivelcestr',  concerning  one  virgate  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances  in  Middle  Sowy,  and  prays,  etc.,  which  of  them 
have  the  greater  right  in  that  land.     Witness,  etc. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  12$ 


Memb,  24//. 

415.  Robert  de  Cumwyz,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Hugh 
Strecch',  concerning  one  messuage,  twenty  acres  of  land,  and 
twenty-six  acres  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Burcot', 
and  prays,  etc.,  which  of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that 
messuage,  land,  and  meadow,  etc. 

Memb,  2$. 
Roll  of  the  grand  assize  of  the  23rd  year. 

416.  Gilbert  the  miller  of  Wyke,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against 
Isabella  daughter  of  Henry,  concerning  one  virgate  and  five 
acres  of  land  and  one  mill,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Wike,  and 
prays,  etc.,  which  of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land 
and  mill.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb.  2$c/. 

417.  Eborard  son  of  Walter,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Ralph 
le  Sauvage,  concerning  a  third  part  of  one  messuage  with  the 
appurtenances  in  the  suburb  of  Bristol,  and  prays,  etc.,  which  of 
them  have  the  greater  right  in  the  third  part  of  that  messuage. 

418.  Geoffry  de  Tymercumc,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Erni- 
sius  de  Dunheved,  concerning  one  messuage  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  Welles,  and  prays,  etc.,  whether  he  have  the  greater 
right  to  hold  that  messuage  of  the  aforesaid  Ernisius  or  he 
[Emisius]  to  hold  [it]  in  demesne.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb,  26. 

419.  Emisius  de  Dunheved,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against 
Michael  abbot  of  Glaston*,  concerning  four  messuages,  three 
ferlings  of  land,  and  fifteen  acres  of  wood  with  the  appurten- 
ances in  Melles,  and  prays,  etc.,  which  of  them  have  the  greater 
right  in  those  messuages,  land,  and  wood.     Witness,  etc. 

Memb,  26d, 

420.  Henry  Maloyseir,  tenant,  puts,  etc.  against  Nicholas 
By  Nothweie,  concerning  ten  acres  of  land  and  one  acre  of 
meadow  with  the  appurtenances  in  Ghyatton*,  and  prays,  etc., 
which  of  them  have  the  greater  right  in  that  land.     Witness,  etc. 


126  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


ROLL  No.  695,    (Oxfordshire.) 

This  roll  and  No.  696  seem  to  be  portions  of  two  different  records 
of  the  same  eyre.  They  contain  many  entries  in  common.  Some, 
but  not  all,  of  the  following  Somersetshire  entries  are  to  be  found  also 
in  No.  696.  The  latter  roll  contains  the  schedule  of  amercements 
and  some  membranes  devoted  to  pleas  of  the  crown  which  are  wanting 
in  No.  695.     The  date  of  the  roll  is  a.d.  1241. 

Memb.  i. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendt  taken  at  Oxford  in  the  quindene 
of  Easter  in  the  25th  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of 
King  John,  before  W[illiam]  de  Eboraco,  Provost  of  Bevcrlac*,* 
and  his  companions. 

Memb.  3.* 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendt  taken  at  Wicumb  on  Friday  next 
after  the  feast  of  the  Apostles,  Philip  and  James. 

Memb,  2d, 

420a,  Richard  de  Bradestan',  the  attorney  of  Hugh  de  Vivon, 
against  Avclina.  formerly  the  wife  of  Fulk  de  Mcrk,  on  a  plea 
of  dower,  by  Richard  the  ploughman.  He  has  pledged  his 
faith. 

Memb.  4. 

Pleas  at  Oxford  in  the  quindene  of  Easter  before  W.  de 
Eboraco,  Provost  of  Bevcrlac',  and  his  companions,  justices 
itinerant,  in  the  2Sth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of 
King  John. 

Memb,  $. 

42oh.  Ralph  son  of  Nicholas  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Catharine,  formerly  the  wife  of  Michael  son  of 
Nicholas,  on  a  plea  why,  after  the  death  of  Michael  her  husband, 
she  intruded  upon  one  knight's  fee,^  with  the  appurtenances,  in 

^  Beverley. 

^  This  membrane  is  stitched  to  the  foot  of  Memb.  2.  The  entries  ujxjn  it  therefore 
precede  those  on  I  he  dorso  of  Memb.  2. 

^  This  roll  has  '^t/omus*^  in  addition  to  the  knight's  fee,  but  the  word  does  not 
occur  in  Roll  No.  696,  or  in  subsequent  rolls  in  which  the  case  is  recorded. 


Wcstcinnok,  which  remainetl  to  the  same  Ralph  by  virtue  of  a 
line'  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  Kinj;,  liforc  the  justices 
dt  Westminster,  between  William  de  Holcdon,  claimant,  and 
tlie  said  Michael  and  Catharine,  tenants,  etc.  Catharine  did  not 
cpnie.  She  was  attached  by  William  Coch'  and  Gervasc  dc 
Fenhamton.  Let  her,  therefore,  be  put  under  better  pledges, 
that  she  be  at  Laherre.  in  the  county  of  Surrey,  on  Sunday  next 
.\ftcr  the  ascension  of  Our  Lord ;  and  the  first,  etc.  And 
Kalph  puts  in  his  place  Henry  dc  Langeton'  or  Henry  de 
Uraicote.' 

420c.  Wentliana,  wife  of  Nicholas  son  of  Roger,  puts  in  her 
place  Matthew  de  Hakepeth"  against  John  Hretcsch,  Wilham  dc 
Albiton',*  and  others  named  in  the  writ,  on  a  pica  of  dower,  etc. 

Memb.  12. 
420rt'.  Nicholas  son  of  Roger  and  Wcnclina  his  wife  seek 
against  John  lirctfsh'  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of  Shenedon, 
with  the  appurtenances,  and  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of 
Alurington,  with  the  appurtenances,  except  one  virgate  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  and  one-third  part  of  one-half  of  the 
manor  of  Hacwell.  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  county  of 
Somerset,  as  her  dower,  etc.,  and  whereof  John  le  Sor,  her  first 
husband,  endowed  her,  etc.  John  came,  and  also  as  bailiff  of 
Ricliard  the  Earl'  (et  tatnquatn  hallivus  R.  Com.)  and  with  the 
licence  and  assent  of  the  Abbot  dc  Bello  Loco  Regis,  of  Robert 
dc  Escalle  and  W.  de  Eboraco,  Provost  of  Beverlac,  custodians 
of  the  lands  of  the  said  Earl  in  England,  gave  up  to  them  her 
dower,  and  Nicholas  son  of  Roger  gives  jj  mark  for  a  licence 
to  agree.  Therefore  he  [may  go]  without  a  day.  Let  them 
have  their  seisin.  The  same  Nicholas  confesses  that  he  owes 
the  said  Karl  for  the  custody  of  the  lands  and  heirs  and  marriage 
of  the  heirs  of  the  aforesaid  John  le  Sor  235  marks,  of  which  he 

'  See  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  105,  Nu.  27. 

'  Lamlwth.  The  place  is  not  named  in  Ibc  entry  on  Roll  696.  See  further  as  to 
this  case,  Nos.  4x011  and  ^iqy. 

'  Roll  G96  has  "AllitoD."  In  ihe  margin  is  written  Gloiiceslet  and  Somersel. 
(See  No.  ^aod). 

'  I  Ibink  thai  Kichaid  de  Clare,  Earl  or  Gloucester,  must  1-c  intended.  Uiukwell 
wu  helH  Iry  amii her  J ohn  Sor  of  the  Larl  of  Gloucester  {see  "  Kirby's  Quest,"  Som. 
Rec.  hoc.,  p.  agi.  According  to  CoUinsan  there  was  a  ^mily  connection  between 
lit  Snrs  and  Clares  (vol.  ii,  p.  306).  The  Abbot  of  Bello  Loco  was  the  Ablwl  ul 
Bonlieu  in  Himpshire,  white  Uabel  de  Clare  wai  buried  (Dtigd.  Baronage.) 


128  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

•*       '"  ■■  ■»■■■■  ■  .III.  ■      ^^^^^^^^^^^^1^1^  11^        w     I  ■       ■  ^^m^^^  ^^^^^^m^^^»     m  u     ■ 

will  pay  at  the  festival  of  St.  Michael  in  the  twenty-fifth  and 
beginning  of  the  twenty-sixth  years,  8o  marks  at  St.  J^mes  in 
Bristoll,  and  at  Easter  next  following  So  marks,  and  at  the  feast  of 
St.  John  Baptist  next  following  the  same  75  marks,  and  unless 
he  does,  etc.,  he  grants,  etc.* 

420^.  A  day  is  given  to  Robert  de  Neuton',  claimant,  and 
James  de  Orchard,  tenant,  of  the  manor  of  Orchard  at  Canter- 
bury, in  three  weeks  after  Trinity,  etc.* 

Memb,  i^d. 

420/".  Jordan  de  Harpeford'  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  de  Bodeviir, 
on  a  plea  why  she  made  waste,  sale,  and  ruin  of  the  lands,  houses, 
gardens  and  woods  which  she  holds  in  dower  of  the  inheritance 
of  the  said  Jordan  in  Langeford  to  the  disherison  of  him,  Jordan, 
contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc'  Margery  did  not  come.  She 
was  attached  by  Ranulph  de  Flury  and  John  Cape.  Therefore 
let  her  be  put  under  better  pledges  that  she  be  present  on  the 
next  coming  of  the  justices ;  and  the  first,  etc. 


ROLL  No.  867.     (SURREY.) 

This  roll  and  No.  868  are  also  in  a  measure  duplicates.  They 
record  proceedings  at  Lambeth  and  elsewhere  in  Surrey  in  a.d.  1241. 

Memb,  i. 

Essoins  taken  at  Lamheyc,  in  the  county  of  Surrey,  in  five 
weeks  after  Easter,  before  W[illiam]  de  Eboraco,  Provost  of 
Beverlac,  and  his  companions,  justices  itinerant,  in  the  twenty- 
fifth  year. 

Memb.  \d. 

420^.  Nicholas  de  Meriette  against  Richard  de  Dunmere  to 
hear  his  judgment  on  a  plea  of  customs  and  service  (de  plcut  and 

^  Gloucester  and  Somerset  in  the  margin. 

'  The  matter  was  there  and  then  settled  by  a  fine.      Sec  **  Somerset  Fines, 
p.  108,  No.  38. 

'  Sec  note  to  No.  668. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 29 


judm  suu  de  coni  It  PuiZ)  by  Richard  le  Norreis.     Joan  wife  of 
the  same  Nicholas  against  the  same  by  Richard  son  of  Hugh.^ 

Essoins  flfe  ma/o  veniendi  taken  at  Bermundes*  on  the  morrow  of 
the  ascension  of  Our  Lord. 

420^  Robert  de  Gurnay  against  the  Master  of  the  Knights 
of  the  Temple  in  England  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  John  son  of 
Walter. 

Memb,  2. 

Essoins  taken  at  Bermundes'  on  Sunday  next  after  the  ascension 
of  Our  Lord. 

Essoins  taken  there  on  Monday  next  after  the  ascension  of  Our 
Lord. 

420/.  Robert  de  Litlecote,  the  attorney  of  Adam  le  Waleis, 
against  the  Prior  of  St.  Swithun  of  Winton'  on  a  plea  by  what 
right,  whereon  inquest,  by  Nicholas  le  Frankelein,  in  three  weeks 
after  St  John  Baptist's  day  at  Lewes  in  the  county  of  Sussex. 
He  has  pledged  his  faith.  None  of  the  jurors  comes.  Therefore 
let  the  sheriff  have  the  bodies  of  all,  etc.* 

420/*.  Agnes,^  wife  of  Gervase  de  Hatton*,  against  James  de 
Chissedun'  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  Walter  Page.  On  the  next 
coming  of  the  justices.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same 
day  is  given  in  banco  to  Gervase,  the  husband  of  Agnes. 

Memb,  3. 

Pleas  and  assizes  at  Bermundes'  in  the  county  of  Surrey,  in 
five  weeks  after  Easter,  in  the  25th  year,  on  the  eyre  of  William 
de  Eboraco,  Provost  of  Beverlac,  and  his  companions. 

Memb,  id. 

420^.  Robert  de  Gurnay  puts  in  his  place  John  de  Fernton 
against  the  Master  of  the  Knights  of  the  Temple  in  England 
on  a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

*  This  entry  is  intended  to  be  struck  out.  In  the  margin  is  "z/^-f-."  In  Roll 
No.  868  it  is  also  struck  out,  but  there  it  appears  under  the  following  title  : — "  Kssoins 
taken  on  the  same  day  at  VVestminster  concerning  the  eyre  of  Henry  de  Bathon." 
There  are  about  a  dozen  other  entries  of  the  kind  relating  to  Wilts,  Southampton, 
Dorset,  Gloucester,  Sussex,  and  Devon,  under  the  same  head.  I  have  not  seen 
another  case  of  a  record  of  proceedings  in  two  different  courts  on  the  same  roll  such 
as  this.  Roll  868  says  nothing  about  hearing  judgment,  and  describes  the  dispute 
as  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter.     See  No.  420///. 

*  **>wi-''  in  the  margin.  ^  Over  her  name  is  written  *^  habetvirum.'' 

.S 


I30  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb,  5. 

420/.  Avelina,*  formerly  the  wife  of  Fulk  de  Merk',  seeks 
against  Hugh  de  Vivien  one-third  part  of  50J.  of  rent,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Schepton*,  as  her  dower,  etc  Hugh  comes 
and  by  licence  they  are  agreed,  and  the  agreement  is  that  she 
should  release  the  whole  for  8  marks,  which  he  will  pay  by  the 
octaveof  St.  John  Baptist,  and  unless  he  do,  it  is  agreed  that  the 
sheriff  may  cause,  etc. 

Memb.  7. 

^20m.  Richard  de  Dunmere  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Nicholas  de  Meriette  and  Joan  his  wife  on  a  plea 
that  they  should  discharge  him  of  the  customs  and  services 
which  Richard,  Count  of  Poictou  and  [Earl]  of  Cornwall,  claims 
of  him  touching  the  free  tenement  which  he  holds  of  them  in 
Dunmere,  and  whereof  the  same  Nicholas  and  Joan  ought  to 
acquit  him,  etc.  They  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  they  were 
attached  by  William  Augevin'  and  William  Metlefrem.  There- 
fore let  them  be  put  under  better  pledges  that  they  be  at  West- 
minster on  the  octave  of  St.  Hilary,  etc.,  and  the  first,  etc.^ 

420«.  Ralph  son  of  Nicholas  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Katharine,  formerly  the  wife  of  Michael  son  of 
Ralph,  on  a  plea  why,  after  the  death  of  her  husband,  she 
intruded  upon  one  knight's  fee,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  West 
Cinnok,  which  should  remain  to  the  same  Ralph  by  virtue  of  a 
fine  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King  before  the  justices 
at  Westminster*  between  William  de  Holenden,  claimant,  and 
the  said  Michael  and  Katharine,  tenants.  She  does  not  come, 
etc.  She  was  attached,  first  by  William  Coche  and  Godfrey 
de  Fenhampton  ;  secondly,  by  William  Rugecote  and  William 
de  Barneville*.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  Let  Katharine  be 
distrained  by  her  lands,  etc.,  that  she  be  at  Canterbury  in  one 
month  after  Trinity,  etc. 


^  In  Roll  868,  Avelina  is  called  Juliana,  and  Hugh  is   Hugh  de  Vinny.      No 
doubt  it  should  be  Hugh  de  Vivon. 
'^  In  the  margin  is  **  +  .  b." 
^  In  22  Hen.  III.     See  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  105,  No.  27. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  131 


ROLL  No.  359.    (Kent.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  a.d.  1241. 

Memb,  i. 

Pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Canterbury,  in  the  county  of 
Kent,  on  the  octave  of  Trinity,  in  the  twenty-fifth  year  of  the 
reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  King  John,  before  W[illiam]  de 
Eboraco,  Provost  of  Beverlac,  and  his  companions. 

Memb,  2. 

4^200,  Emeric  Orcherd  gives  20s,  for  licence  to  agree  with 
Robert  de  Neuton  and  James  Orcherd  on  a  plea  of  land,  by 
pledge  of  Robert  de  Neuton. 


ROLL  No.  37.    (Berkshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  also  a.d.  1241. 

Memb,  i. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Rading  on  the  octave  of 
St.  Michael  in  the  twenty-fifth  and  beginning  of  the  twenty-sixth 
years  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  King  John. 

Memb.  2d, 

Essoins  de  malo  lecti  taken   at   Rading   in   three  weeks   after 
St.  Michael's  day. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi} 

42qfi.  Gerard  de  Cogres  against  the  same  [Helewisa  de 
Mandeviir*]  upon  the  like  [a  plea  of  dower*]  by  Geoffry  de 
Turribus  to  the  same  time  [the  octave  of  All  Saints,  at  Ivelcestr*]. 
He  has  pledged  his  faith. 

420^.  Ralph  de  Caylloay  against  the  same  upon  the  same 
by  William  Sparke.     He  has  pledged  his  faith. 

*  These  essoins  are  taken  on  the  same  day— three  weeks  after  Michaelmas. 

*  The  words  in  hrackets  arc  derived  from  a  previous  entry  relating  to  Dorset. 
See  No.  420X, 


132  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

42or.  Master  William  de  Cogre  against  the  same  upon  the 
same  by  Richard  Uppehill.     He  has  pledged  his  faith.' 

420s,  William  Fossard  by  Roger  le  Wrth.  He  has  pledged 
^Ms  faith. 

420/.  William  de  Havenebare  by  William  de  la  Pyne.  He 
'las  pledged  his  faith. 

420^.  Geoffry  de  Gulebare  by  William  de  la  Pyne  the 
younger.'* 

42OW.  Adam  Cok  by  Walter  de  Linton.  He  has  pledged 
his  faith. 

420Lr.  Nicholas  Avenel  by  Richard  Page.  He  has  pledged 
his  faith. 

.Memb,  4. 

Pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Rading  on  the  octave  of  St. 
Michael  in  the  25th  and  beginning  of  the  26th  years  of  the 
reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  King  John,  before  W[illiam]  de 
Eboraco,  Provost  of  Beverlac,  and  his  companions,  justices 
itinerant. 

Mevib,  10. 

420/.  Katharine,  formerly  the  wife  of  Michael  son  of  Nicholas 
was  attached  to  answer  Ralph  son  of  Nicholas  on  a  plea  why,  after 
the  death  of  the  said  Michael,  her  husband,  she  intruded  upon 
one  knight's  fee,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  West  Cynnok,  which 
should  remain  to  Ralph  by  virtue  of  a  fine  made  in  the  court  of 
our  lord  the  King  who  now  is  at  Westminster,  between  William 
de  Holeden',  querent,  and  the  said  Michael  and  Katharine, 
tenants,  etc.  And  Katharine  by  her  attorney  comes  and  seeks 
a  view.  Let  her  have  it.  A  day  is  given  them  on  the  quindene 
of  All  Saints  at  Ivelcestr',  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  and  in  the 
meantime,  etc.* 

Memb,  13^. 

420^.  A  day  is  given  to  Helewisa,  formerly  the  wife  of 
Robert  de  Mandevill,  and  Richard,  parson  of  the  church  of 
Hardinton*,  and  all  others  named  in  the  writ,  upon  a  plea  of 
dower,  on  the  morrow  of  All  Souls  at  Ivelcestr*,  in  the  county 
of  Somerset.     And  Helewisa  puts  in  her  place  William  Morin. 

In  the  margin  is  ^^  non  breve.^* 
^  This  entry  is  struck  out,  and  the  words  ^*  pest  venit^^  added.    There  is  the  entr  . 
"  non  breve  "  in  the  margin.  •  Sec  Nos.  420^  and  420/f. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 33 

Memb.  16. 

^20zz.  Margaret  de  Sumeri  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  John,  Dean  of  Kelveton*,  on  a  plea  why  he  held  plea  in 
court  christian  concerning  Margaret's  chattels  which  are  not 
[touched]  by  will  or  marriage,  contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc. 
And  against  Henry  de  Gant  on  a  plea  why  he  sued  the  same 
plea  in  the  said  court,  contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc.,  and  the 
Dean  did  not  come.  The  sheriff  certified  that  he  [the  Dean] 
had  no  lay  fee,  etc.  Therefore  the  Bishop  of  Bath  is  notified 
that  he  should  cause  [the  Dean]  to  come  to  Ivelcestre,  in  the 
county  of  Somerset,  on  the  octave  of  All  Saints,  etc.  Henry 
did  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Walter  Fab'r  of  Stoclande 
and  Walter  son  of  Godfrey.  Therefore  let  him  be  put  under 
gage  and  better  pledges  that  he  be  [present]  at  the  said  time. 
And  the  first,  etc* 


ROLL  No.  756.    (Somerset.) 

This  is  the  roll  for  Somerset  of  the  eyre  held  in  the  27  th  year  of 
Henry  HI.  (i 242-1 243).  It  is  the  first  record  which  we  have  for  this 
county  of  such  an  eyre  since  the  King's  accession.  The  rolls  of  previous 
eyres,  when  the  justices  were  sent  out  to  take  all  manner  of  pleas,  are 
lost  We  know  that  in  3  Henry  IH.,  on  the  4th  November,  writs  were 
issued  to  the  sheriffs  of  nearly  all  counties,  including  Somerset.  The 
form  of  the  writ  is  to  be  seen  in  i  "  Rot.  Claus."  p.  380,  where  it  appears 
on  a  roll  of  2  Henry  III.  This  is  a  mistake,  as  a  comparison  of  the 
dates  and  a  reference  to  the  Patent  Roll  for  the  3rd  year  abundantly 
show.  Perhaps  the  clerk,  when  he  entered  the  writ  of  the  4th  Novem- 
ber, had  forgotten  that  a  new  regnal  year  had  begun  on  the  28th 
October.  We  have  upon  the  dorso  of  the  Patent  Roll  a  great  deal  of 
information,  and  in  particular  that  the  justices  assigned  for  Devon, 
Somerset,  and  Dorset  were  Joscelin,  Bishop  of  Bath  and  Glaston,  John 
de  Baiocis  (de  Bayeux),  Osbert  son  of  William,  Robert  de  Cardinam, 
John  Briwes,  and  Roger  Cole,  clerk.  The  articles  of  the  eyre  and 
form  of  oath  were  delivered  to  the  Bishop.  The  feet  of  fines  for 
3  Henry  III.  are  numerous,  and  show  to  some  extent  the  movements 
of  the  justices  in  the  county.    The  loss  of  this   roll  is  a  matter  of 

'  In  the  margin  twice  occurs  the  note  "  t  b." 


I     • 


134  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

exceptional  regret.  The  country  had  just  passed  through  turbulent 
times.  The  peace  of  Lambeth  was  signed  on  the  12th  September, 
121 7.  The  rebellion  of  the  Barons,  aided  by  the  French  King,  was 
over,  and  the  advisers  of  the  young  King  were  able  to  direct  their 
attention  to  local  affairs,  and  to  make  those  visitations  of  inquiry  and 
redress  which,  in  most  counties,  were  badly  needed.  The  roll  of  this 
eyre,  we  cannot  doubt,  would  have  shown  us  something,  if  not  much,  of 
the  consequences  of  the  "  tempus  guerre,^^ 

Another  eyre  for  the  county  was  ordered  on  the  ist  January, 
II  Henry  IIL  (1226-7).  ^^  this  occasion  the  justices  assigned  were 
Thomas  de  Muleton,  Robert  de  Lexinton,  Warin  son  of  Joel,  William 
de  Sorewell,  and  Jordan  Oliver.  The  first  day  was  to  be  at  Ilchester 
in  one  month  from  Hilary  (Vol.  2  "Rot.  Claus."  p.  205^  and  p.  151). 
The  feet  of  fines  for  this  year  are  very  numerous,  so  that  we  may  assume 
the  business  to  have  been  heavy.  On  this  eyre  the  citizens  of  Bath 
requested  the  justices  to  come  thither  to  take  the  pleas  of  that  place, 
a  request  which  the  judges  would  not  concede  until  the  King  was 
consulted.  The  Abbot  of  Glaston  also  claimed  jurisdiction  within  the 
twelve  hides  in  the  Isle  of  Avalon  in  respect  of  all  manner  of  pleas, 
to  the  exclusion  even  of  the  royal  justices.  As  to  this  the  King  was 
also  promptly  consulted.  He  replied  that  what  liberties  the  citizens  of 
Bath  had  they  should  enjoy  ;  and  that,  as  to  the  claim  of  the  abbot,  no 
cause  should  be  dismissed  from  the  King's  court  without  reasonable 
warrant  from  the  King's  predecessors  shown  by  the  abbot.  The  justices 
further  informed  the  King  that  William  Briwer'  the  elder  had  made  a 
fishery  in  the  Parret,  to  the  injury  of  Ilchester  and  Somerton,  and  to 
the  prejudice  of  the  whole  county.  The  King's  answer  was  that  the 
justices  must  do  what  law  and  custom  demanded,  notwithstanding  that 
the  fishery  was  established  before  the  eyre  of  Joscelin,  Bishop  of  Bath, 
and  his  companions  in  the  county  (2  "Rot.  Claus."  p.  174^).  This 
exception  had  reference  to  the  rule  that  a  matter  should  not  be  inquired 
into  if  it  had  arisen  before  the  last  preceding  eyre,  and  had  not  then 
been  presented.  The  letter  from  the  King  is  dated  8th  March, 
1 1  Henry  IH.  On  the  12th  March  the  justices  were  ordered  to  inform 
the  abbot  that  he  must  attend  at  Westminster  in  three  weeks  after 
Easter  to  show  by  what  warrant  he  claimed  to  hold  such  court,  and  that 
in  the  meantime  all  pleas  within  the  Isle  of  Avalon  should  be  put 
in  respite  (2  "Rot.  Claus."  p.  209^).  On  the  21st  May  the  justices 
were  told  not  to  intermeddle  with  the  matter  of  the  Abbot  of  Glaston 
until  further  instructions.  The  judges  were  then  in  Wiltshire  (2  "Rot. 
Claus."  p.  186^).  On  the  T8th  Feburary,  in  the  same  year,  the  justices 
were  informed  that  the  King,  by  his  charters,  had  confirmed  to  the 
Bishop  of  Bath,  and  the  churches  of  Bath,  Glaston,  and  Wells,  certain 
liberties   therein   specified,   and  he  ordered  the  justices  to  have  the 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 35 

charters  read  before  them  in  every  county  of  their  eyre,  and  to  uphold 
them  (2  "Rot.  Claus."  p.  172^).  In  January  the  King  directed  that 
all  pleas  of  **  the  part  of  the  vill  of  Bristol  called  Radeclive  "  should  be 
taken  before  the  justices  in  Somerset,  and  that  the  sheriff  of  Gloucester 
should  not  intermeddle  therewith  (2  **  Rot.  Claus.*'  p.  167/;.)  In  the 
later  roll  before  us  it  will  be  seen  that  the  course  so  ordained  v.-as 
followed.  One  more  direction  of  the  King,  gleaned  from  the  Close 
Rolls,  may  not  be  out  of  place :  The  King  instructed  Robert  de 
Lexinton  and  his  companions  that  all  assizes  and  pleas  summoned 
before  them  which  were  of  the  bailiwick  of  Thomas  de  Cyrencester  of 
the  honor  of  Berkhampstead,  and  of  all  other  lands  in  the  dower  of 
the  Queen,  the  King's  mother,  should  be  held  before  any  of  them, 
together  with  Thomas,  or  his  attorney,  in  the  Queen's  Court  (2  **Rot. 
Claus."  p.  1 69^).  Thomas  de  Cyrencester  was  constable  of  the  castle 
of  Berkhampstead,  in  Hertfordshire.     He  was  also  sheriff  of  Somerset. 

In  the  following  year,  12  Henry  III.,  we  have  record  of  five  fines 
levied  at  Taunton  before  Thomas  de  Muleton,  Robert  de  lexinton, 
Ralph  Musard,  John  de  Baiocis,  and  Jordan  Oliver.  Upon  what 
commission  the  justices  were  then  in  the  county  I  am  not  at  present 
able  to  say. 

The  next  eyre  appears  to  have  been  ordered  in  19  Henry  III.  On 
the  3rd  September  in  that  year  (1235)  Robert  de  Curtenay,  Robert  de 
Lexinton,  Adam  son  of  William,  Robert  de  Bcllo  Campo,  and  Jordan 
Oliver  were  commissioned  to  take  all  pleas  in  the  counties  of  Somerset 
and  Dorset  ("  Pat.  Roll "  No.  44,  Memb.  4^).  Robert  de  Curtenay 
did  not  sit,  Henry  de  Ortiaco  being  put  in  his  place  (JbiJ.).  The  feet 
of  fines  for  20  Henry  III.  are  exceptionally  numerous.  All  fines  levied 
in  the  county  were  taken  before  the  justices  above  named,  except  Adam 
son  of  William,  whose  name  does  not  once  occur.  They  range  in  date 
between  the  morrow  of  the  Epiphany  at  Bath  and  the  Sunday  after  St. 
Lucy  at  Ilchester.  St.  Lucy's  day  was  13th  December.  Between 
these  dates  the  justices  seem  to  have  moved  backwards  and  forwards 
between  Sherborne  and  Ilchester.  In  the  absence  of  the  roll  of  the 
e)Te  it  is  difficult  to  explain  their  movements,  or  the  reason  for  the 
length  of  their  stay  in  the  West,  especially  as  Robert  de  Lexinton  was 
expected  in  Coventry  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity  in  the  same  year. 
(**  Close  Roll  "  No.  48,  Memb.  14^). 

We  now  come  to  the  eyre  of  27  Henry  III.  (1242-3),  the  roll  of 
which  is  before  us.  The  justices  commissioned  on  this  occasion  for 
the  county  of  Somerset  were  Roger  de  Thurkilby,  Gilbert  de  Preston, 
William  de  Sancto  Edmundo,  and  Alan  de  Farnham.  All  the  extant 
fines  in  the  county  for  that  year  were  levied  before  these  justices.  The 
first  day  was  fixed  for  the  quindene  of  Hilary  at  Ilchester  (**  Pat.  Roll " 
No.  51,  27  Henry  III.,  Memb.  4^/).     The  writ  to  the  sheriff  is  dated 


136  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

4th  January,  and  it  is  the  only  case  of  an  eyre  upon  that  roll.  There  is, 
however,  a  commission,  amongst  many  others  of  the  kind  relating  to 
other  counties,  to  deliver  the  gaol  at  Ilchester  dated  i  July  (Memb.  id). 
This  seems  remarkable,  having  regard  to  the  fact  that  but  few  months 
had  elapsed  since  the  justices  of  the  eyre  were  sitting  at  the  place. 
Presumably  there  had  been  a  considerable  increase  in  the  number  of 
arrested  persons,  and  perhaps  the  gaol  which  had  long  been  notoriously 
insecure  had  been  strengthened  at  last  in  obedience  to  the  King's 
repeated  instructions.  The  justices  assigned  for  this  duty  were  the 
Prior  of  Wrotham,  John  de  Reingny,  John  de  Aura,  and  Nicholas  de 
Punsont.  No  roll  is  to  be  found  of  their  proceedings.  The  eyre  roll 
seems  to  be  practically  complete.  All  the  feet  of  fines  taken  in  the 
county,  with  the  exception  of  five,  can  be  traced  in  it.  They  were  all 
levied  between  the  quindene  of  Hilary  and  the  octave  of  the  Purifi- 
cation, the  9th  February.  From  this,  and  the  fact  that  Roger  de 
Thurkelby  was  sitting  at  Westminster  in  Easter  term  following,  we  may 
assume  that  the  business  of  the  eyre  was  quickly  despatched.  I  have 
already  observed  upon  the  attendance  of  the  hundreds  (see  Introd.  to 
Roll  No.  755).  There  is  no  schedule  of  amercements.  This  is  to  be 
regretted.  Perhaps  it  was  kept  on  a  separate  roll  on  this  occasion. 
The  ordeal,  if  we  except  battle,  has  of  course  entirely  disappeared. 
The  roll  gives  but  few  instances  of  wager  of  battle :  notably  two  in  civil 
actions  (Nos.  533  and  564)  and  one  upon  an  appeal  (No.  1223).  Trial 
by  jury  or  inquest  was  growing  apace.  The  days  when  an  appellee 
had  no  choice,  unless  he  were  old  or  maimed,  but  to  fight  or  go  to  the 
ordeal,  had  passed  away,  and  the  time  of  Bracton,  when  he  had  always 
the  choice  between  the  duel  and  trial  by  the  country,  had  almost  come. 
Appeals  are  still  quashed  because  the  appellor  does  not  offer  battle  (see 
e.g.  No.  820).  Nevertheless  at  the  date  of  this  roll  an  appellee  could 
often  avoid  a  fight.  He  could  have  an  inquest  upon  some  preliminary 
question,  such  as  that  the  appeal  was  malicious  (No.  929  is  a  good 
example).  Professor  Maitland  deals  with  this  transitional  period  in  his 
Introduction  to  his  "  Gloucestershire  Pleas  of  the  Crown."  Yet  it  is  to 
be  noted  that  in  No.  looi  we  have  two  appeals  in  which  the  injured 
parties  offer  battle  in  due  form,  and  the  appellee  in  each  puts  himself 
upon  the  country  on  the  general  issue,  as  if  it  were  a  matter  of  course 
to  do  so.  The  tendency  seems  to  have  been  against  the  procedure  by 
private  appeal,  and  in  favour  of  that  by  indictment.  Often  we  find 
appeals  quashed  for  some  reason  or  another  not  always  apparent,  and 
the  appellees  tried  by  the  country  (see  Nos.  852,  858, 1226,  etc.)  When 
appeals  failed,  and  the  King  prosecuted  as  upon  matters  affecting  his 
peace,  the  country  manifestly  could  be  the  only  tribunal.  The  King 
could  not  offer  battle.  There  is  no  mention  made  of  payment  by  an 
appellee  to  the  King  for  an  inquest,  nor  do  I  find  any  case  in  which  a 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


137 


derendant  refused  to  put  himself  upon  ihe  country.  Four  sheriffs  of 
Somerset  are  named:  Thomas  deCyrencestc'(No,  833),  who  held  office 
ffiom  13  Henry  III.  to  the  early  part  of  22  Henry  HI.,  except  during 
the  second  half  of  the  seventeenth  year  and  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth ; 
Xlichard  de  l.angeford  (Nos.  814,  930,  and  939),  who  was  in  office 
for  three  quarlers  of  22  Henry  HI.,  and  for  one  quarter  of  23 
Henry  HI. ;  Herbert  son  of  Matthew  (Nos.  799,  8di,  930,  and  968), 
who  held  office  for  half  of  23  Henry  HI.,  and  Joel  de  ValletOTta 
(Nos.  516,  771.  1152,  and  1357),  whose  appointment  as  sheriff  cannot 
be  traced.  He  probably  acted  for  but  a  trifling  time.  It  might 
be  suggested  that  Joel  was  on!y  deputy  sheriff,  but  I  venture  to  think 
that  the  fact  that  he  was  fined  by  the  justices  for  neglect  of  official 
duties  is  against  this  view.  The  deputy  sheriff  was  the  agent  of  the 
sheriff  then  as  now.  He  was  appointed  by  the  writ  of  the  sheriff 
himself,  not  by  the  crown  ;  and  although  a  deputy  might,  and  indeed 
was,  often  described  by  the  word  viceeomes  instead  of  sufi-viffcoma,  I 
think  that  it  would  have  been  said  then,  as  it  would  be  said  now.  in  case 
uf  his  default,  "rispondeat  superior" — the  sheriff  must  answer  for  the 
tJcEaulls  of  his  officer.  One  appeal  (No.  929)  relates  to  a  case  of 
rounding,  six  years  before  this  eyre,  in  zi  Henry  IH.  A  previous 
gaol  delivery  is  referred  to  (Nos.  907  and  965),  but  the  date  of  it  is 
not  given.  There  are  but  few  actions  of  debt  upon  the  roll — six  01 
seven  in  all.  This  form  of  action  was  known  to  (Jlanvill.  The  writ 
was  then  a  close  copy  of  the  writ  of  right  tor  land,  the  difference 
between  land  and  money  withheld,  between  a  specific  thing  from  which 
the  plaintiff  wa.s  deforced,  and  the  right  to  re()a>Tyient  of  money  due, 
not  being  then  fully  appreciated.  At  that  time  there  could  be  trial 
of  battle  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  This  mode  of  trial  dis- 
appeared eariy,  and  in  this  roll  we  find  "detains"  used  in  place  of 
"deforces"  (see  No.  728),  some  evidence  of  the  growing  appreciation 
of  a  difference  between  the  nature  of  the  two  actions.  The  writ  was 
costly.  The  plaintiff  had  often  to  promise  the  King  a  quarter  or  a 
third  of  all  that  he  might  recover,  (i  "  History  of  English  I.aw," 
pp.  303-4.)     This  fact  may  account  for  the  paucity  of  such  suits. 

Memb.  i. 

Picas   and    Assizes   at  Yvclce.str'   on  the   quindene  of  Hilary 

in  the  27th  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  King 

John,  before  Roger  de  Thiirkileby  and  his  companions. 

421.  Herbert  de  Caune,  sworn,'  GeofTr)'  de  Laworton,  sworn, 

William  Malet,  sworn,  Bartholomew  de  Eueneb'gh,  sworn,  four 

knights  summoned  to  elect  twelve  to  make  a  recognition   of 

1  "JnT"  is  written  over  each  of  Ihe  fuur  names. 


138  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


grand  assize  between  Thomas  Treveht,  querent,  and  Richard  le 
Mazun  and  Margery  his  wife,  tenants  of  one  virgate  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances  in  Pyrinton,  in  respect  of  which  Richard  and 
Margery,  who  are  the  tenants,  have  put  themselves  upon  the 
grand  assize,  and  pray  that  a  recognition  be  made  whether 
they  or  Thomas  have  the  greater  right  in  the  aforesaid  land, 
come  and  elect  them  [the  twelve],  to  wit,  Robert  de  Seintebarbe, 
Robert  de  Cuntevill',  Robert  de  Chilton,  Ralph  son  of  Bernard, 
William  de  Grindham,  Hugh  Fichet,  Simon  de  Ralegh, 
William  de  Tyilli,  William  de  Aystun,  William  le  Bret,  Ralph 
Fitzurse,  Gilbert  de  Thome.  Afterwards  they  [the  parties]  are 
agreed,  and  Thomas  gives  20s.  for  a  licence  to  agree^  by  his 
pledges  Ralph  Fi'-zurse  and  John  de  Renny.  A  day  is  given 
on  the  morrow  of  the  Purification.  And  then  let  the  twelve 
come,  etc. 

422.  The  same  our  knights  summoned  to  choose  twelve  to 
make  a  recognition  of  the  grand  assize  between  Emisius  de 
Dunheved,  querent,  and  Geoffry  de  Tymerscumb*,  tenant,  of 
one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Welles,  in  respect  of 
which  the  same  Geoffry,  who  is  the  tenant,  puts  himself  upon 
the  grand  assize  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  prays  that  a  recc^- 
nition  be  made  whether  he  have  the  better  right  to  hold  that 
messuage  of  the  aforesaid  Emisius  or  whether  Emisius  should 
hold  it  in  demesne,  come  and  elect  them,  to  wit,*  Upon  this  the 
Burgesses  of  Welles  come  [and  say]  that  the  grand  assize 
ought  not  to  be  made  of  any  tenement  within  their  town  of 
Welles,  and  they  proffer  a  charter  of  King  John,  which  testifies 
that  the  town  of  Welles  is  a  free  borough  and  that  the  men  of  the 
same  town  are  free  burgesses,  and  therefore  it  is  said  by  the 
bailiffs  of  the  same  town  that  they  should  have  justice  done 
therein  (quod  teneant  inde  justiciam)  according  to  the  customs 
of    the    same    borough.*     And    because    the    county    [court] 

*  See  "Somerset  Fines,'*  p.  124.  Thomas  acknowledged  the  right  of  Margery, 
and  for  this  Richard  and  Margery  granted  to  Thomas  a  fourth  part  of  the  land  to 
hold  of  them  and  the  heirs  of  Margery,  rendering  yearly  one  pair  of  white  gloves  and 
one  penny,  and  doing  the  royal  service  which  was  due  in  respect  of  that  fourth  part. 
The  statement  as  to  the  fine  in  the  above  entry  was  written  later  and  occupies  a 
vacant  space  above  the  grant  of  the  day. 

*  The  names  are  omitted  here. 

^  This  confirms  a  note  by  Prof.  Maitland  in  his  edition  of  "Bracton's  Note 
Book  "  (Vol.  ii,  p.  75),  in  which  he  suggests  that  there  were  towns  in  which  the 
grand  assize  would  not  lie,  more  antiquated  forms  of  litigation  having  been  preserved 
to  the  townsfolk  by  royal  charter. 


SOMEKSETSIIIRK    I'LEAS. 


Considered  tliat  the  grand  assize  sliould  be  made  between 
them  when  by  right  it  ought  not  to  be  made,  therefore  to 
judgment  upon  the  county  [court],'  Afterwards  it  is  shown 
that  the  messuage  is  not  within  the  town  of  Welles.  Therefore 
it  is  considered  that  the  grand  assize  lies  between  them,  and 
that  it  should  proceed.  Therefore  the  aforesaid  four  knights, 
summoned,  etc.,  come  and  elect  them,  to  wit,  Jordan  la  Ware, 
William  Tylli,  John  de  Rengny,  John  de  Chamflur',  Geoffry 
Daneys,  William  de  Ayeston,  Geoffry  de  Laverton',  Ralph 
dc  Sulenny,  Joceus  dc  Baiocis,  Robert  Malhcrbe,  Henry 
de  Stanweir,  William  Fukeram,  Adam  de  Ayston',  Robert 
6a^;etripe,  Simon  de  Ralegh,  and  Adam  Gyaync''     .     .     . 

.  .  .  .  1  mark  for  licence  to  agree  by  pledge  of  Bar- 
tholomew de  Euilebergh. 

423.  The  same  four  knights  summoned  to  choose  twelve  lo 
make  recognition  of  grand  assize  between  Walter  Russell, 
querent,  and  Robert  dc  Cunyz,  tenant  of  one-half  of  a  messuage 
and  twenty-six  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Sidenhara, 
concerning  which  Robert,  who  is  tenant,  lias  put  himself  upon 
the  grand  assize  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  prays  that  a  recog- 
nition be  made  whether  he  have  the  greater  right  in  the  half  of 
the  said  messuage  and  land,  as  of  those  [lands]  of  which  Robert 
his  grandfather  enfeoffed  Custancia,  his  [the  tenant's]  mother,  or 
the  said  Walter,  come  and  elect  them,  to  wit,  Henry  de  Stawell, 
sworn,  Robert  de  Baggetripe,  sworn,  Ralph  son  of  Bernard, 
sworn,  Gilbert  le  Daneys,  sworn,  William  Ftchet  of  Merchc, 
sworn,  Geoffry  de  Chauton',  sworn,  William  de  Grindlam,  sworn, 
Thomas  de  Crukct  (this  name  is  struck  out),  Hugh  Fichet, 
sworn,  William  le  Bret,  sworn,  William  de  Sancto  Stephano, 
swoni,  Richard  de  Holne,  sworn,  Herbert  dc  Kaune,  sworn,  who 
say  upon  their  oath  that  one  Robert  Russell  held  the  said  half 
messuage  and  twenty-six  acres  of  land,  and  had  to  wife  one  Isolda, 
by  whom  he  had  two  daughters — ^Custancia,  the  first  born,  mother 
of  the  said  Robert  Cunyz,  and  one  Margery,  who  died  without  heir 
of  her  body  ;  and  that  after  the  death  of  Isolda,  he  had  one 
Matilda  as  his  concubine  for  thirteen  years,  by  whom  he  had  the 
aforesaid  Walter,  who  was  twelve  years  old  before  he  [Robert] 
married  Matilda.     Afterwards  he  had  by  Matilda,  after  he  had 


I40  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

married  her,  one  Custancia,  who,  after  the  death  of  her  father,  had 
half  his  inheritance,  and  the  aforesaid  Robert  [Cunyz]  the  other 
half.  Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  Robert  de  Cunyz  g^ves 
I  mark  for  a  licence  to  make  a  concord  by  pledge  of  Walter. 
And  it  is  agreed  that  the  said  Robert  should  acknowledge  the 
half  messuage  and  twenty-six  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances 
to  be  the  right  of  Walter,  as  that  which  descended  to  him  by 
right  of  inheritance  from  Robert  father  of  Walter.*  A  day  is 
given  on  the  morrow  of  the  Purification.  And  then  let  the  twelve 
come,  etc. 

424.  The  same  four  knights  summoned  to  choose  twelve  to 
make  recognition  of  grand  assize  between  John  son  of  Michael, 
querent,  and  Walter  de  Marisco,  tenant  of  one  virgjate  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances  in  Cherleton,  touching  which  the  same  Walter, 
who  is  the  tenant,  has  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize  of 
our  lord  the  King,  and  prays  that  a  recognition  may  be  made 
as  to  which  of  them  has  the  greater  right  in  the  land,  come  and 
choose  them,  to  wit,  Walter  de  Marisco  (struck  out\  William  de 
Paris,  sworn,  Adam  Gyane,  sworn,  Lanval*  Pancevot,  sworn, 
William  de  Godmaneston',  William  Haket,  Robert  fitz  Payne, 
sworn,  Ralph  Hosk,  sworn,  Robert  de  Bosco,  sworn,  Robert 
Malherbe,  Robert  de  Wateleghe,  sworn,  Phararamun  de  Bollonne, 
sworn,  John  de  Boneville,  sworn,  Herbert  de  Caune,  sworn, 
Bartholomew  de  Eueneberg',  sworn,  and  Geoffry  de  Laworton', 
sworn,*  who  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  aforesaid  Walter,  who 
is  the  tenant,  has  a  greater  right  in  the  land  than  the  aforesaid 
John  son  of  Michael.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Walter 
should  hold  in  peace,  and  his  heirs  after  him,  quit  of  the  afore- 
said John  and  his  heirs  for  ever.  And  John  is  in  mercy  by 
his  pledges  Nicholas  de  Divisis  and  William  Marescall*  of 
Berghes.  And  the  Earl  of  Salisbury,  by  his  attorney,  puts 
forward  his  claim  to  the  aforesaid  John,  whom  he  alleges  to  be 
his  villein.  And  Henry  de  Mara  likewise.  A  day  i§  given 
on  the  morrow  of  the  Purification,  and  then  let  the  twelve 
come,  etc. 

425.  William  Maubaunc,  sworn,  John  de  Chamflur,  sworn, 

^  In  23  Hen.  III.  Walter  Russel  recovered  against  Constance,  daughter  of 
Robert  Russell,  a  moiety  of  a  messuage  and  thirteen  acres  of  land  in  Sydenham  as 
his  right.     See  **  Somerset  Fines,"  pp.  106-7. 

^  The  names  of  the  three  who  are  not  stated  to  have  been  sworn  have  little 
crosses  above  them. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  14I 

William  de  Tylly,  sworn,  and  Robert  de  Bagetrop,  sworn,  four 
kn^rhts  summoned  to  choose  twelve  to  make  a  recognition  of 
grand  assize  between  Robert  Wolbold,  querent,  and  William 
the  Little  {le  Petit\  tenant  of  half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Leghton',  touching  which  the  same  William, 
who  is  the  tenant,  has  put  himself  upon  the  grand  assize  of  our 
lord  the  King,  and  prays  that  a  recognition  may  be  made  as  to 
which  of  them  has  the  greater  right  in  the  land,  come  and 
choose  them,  to  wit,  Henry  de  Karevil*,  John  de  Aure,  Robert 
de  Watelehe,  Alexander  de  Munford,  Roger  Cyrel,  William  son 
of  Adam,  Bartholomew  de  Crileberhe,  Geoffry  de  Laurtune, 
Michael  de  Wantune,  William  Branche,  Adam  Gyane,  Robert 
de  Bosco  of  Kadebiri,  Ralph  de  Sulni,^  Henry  de  Waddune, 
Joceus  de  Baiocis,  Thomas  de  Mortune.  Afterwards  they 
[the  parties]  have  come  to  an  agreement  by  leave :  And 
Robert  Wolbold  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree,  by  his 
pledges  Adam  de  Dunheved  and  Ernisius  de  Dunheved,  and 
William  the  Little  gives  i  mark  for  the  like.  His  pledges 
[are]  Robert  Wolbold  and  Adam  de  Dunheved.*  A  day  is 
given  on  the  morrow  of  the  Purification,  and  then  let  the  twelve 
come,  etc 

426.  Joan,  the  wife  of  William  de  Bykel,  [and]  Elena,  the  wife 
of  Henry  de  Alneto,  put  in  their  place  William  de  Horweye 
against  Richard  de  StafT  and  Sarra  his  wife  upon  a  plea  of 
assize  of  mort  d'ancestor. 

427.  Emma,  formerly  the  wife  of  Geoffry  de  la  Rode,  puts 

in  her  place  Peter  de  Thukkeswell  against  Henry 

and  others,  shown  in  the  writ,  upon  a  plea  of  dower. 

428.  Lucy  de  Monteacuto  puts  in  her  place  Ralph  de  Ferr* 
against  William  le  Deveneys  on  a  plea  of  land,  and  against 
Katharine  de  Monteacuto  upon  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter, 
etc 

429.  William  Branche  puts  in  his  place  Geoffry  de  Wynter- 
bum  against  Amabel  de  Cherelton  on  a  plea  of  custody,  and 
against  Master  John  Bacun  on  a  plea  of  suit 

43a  The  Prior  of  the  Hospital  of  St  John  of  Jerusalem  in 
England   puts  in  his  place  brother  Richard  de    Morton'  or 

'  Soligny. 

'  The  fine  was  taken  at  Hchcsler  on  ihc  morruw  uf  the  Purification,  27  Hen.  III. 
See  '*  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  116.  No.  66. 


142  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Thomas  de   Rothele  against   Henry  de   Herle  on  a  plea  of 
advowson,  upon  which  the  grand  assize,  etc. 

Memb,  id, 

431.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Woteidon,  Richard  Samps',  and  William  son  of  Robert  unjustly, 
etc.,  disseised  John  the  parson  of  Stoke  of  his  free  tenement  in 
Wheteden  after  the  first  crossing,  etc.,*  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  he  disseised  him  [John]  of  one  ferling  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances.  And  Richard  Samps'  and  William  son  of 
Robert  have  not  come.  Therefore  let  the  assize  proceed  against 
them  in  default,  and  they  were  attached  by  Richard  de  Whadden* 
and  William  the  Beadle  {bedelluni)  of  Cudecumbe.*  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy.  And  Robert  de  Woteden'  comes  and  alleges 
nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors  say 
that  the  aforesaid  Robert  and  others  did  not  disseise  the  afore- 
said John  of  the  aforesaid  land,  because  he  himself  is  seised 
thereof  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  aforesaid  Robert  and 
the  others  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  John  is  in  mercy  by  his 
pledge  William  de  Pyrhou.     He  fined  for  i  mark. 

432.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Cheleworth,  the  father  of  Henry,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc., 
of  seven  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Cheleworth.' 
And  whether  after  the  last,  etc.,  which  land  William  Burton  holds, 
who  comes  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should 
remain.  And  Thomas  de  Welles  and  John  de  Stanton,  two  of 
the  recognitors,  do  not  come.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 
The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Robert,  the  father  of  Henry, 
was  not  seised  of  the  aforesaid  seven  acres  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
William  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Henry  is  in  mercy  for  his 
false  claim  by  his  pledge  John  de  Santon'. 

433.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Christina  de 
Clayhengre,  sister  of  Alice,  wife  of  Baldwin  Lengleis,  was  seised 
in  her  demesne,  etc.,  of  one  ferling  of  land  with  the  appurten- 
ances in  Clayhengre  on  the  day  when,  etc.*     And  whether,  etc.,* 

1  1.^.,  the  first  crossing  of  King  Hen.  III.  into  Brittany. 

2  Cutcombe.  »  Chclwoocl. 

*  The  day  of  her  death. 

*  biince  the  perioil  of  limitation.     Sec  No.  454. 


SOMERSE-raJtlRE   PLEAa 


<43 


I 


Which  land  the  Prior  of  Staverden'  holds,  who  comes  and  fully 
concedes  the  assize.  Therefore  let  the  assize  proceed.  The 
jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Christina  did  not  die  seised  of  the 
aforesaid  land,  because  six  weeks  before  her  death  she  gave  that 
land  to  the  aforesaid  Prior,  so  that  the  Prior  was  seised  thereof. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  Prior  [may  go]  without  a  day, 
and  Baldwin  and  Alice  are  in  mercy  for  their  false  claim.  Let 
them  be  in  custody. 

434.  Henry  son  of  Adam,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor  against  Gilbert  Gymcl  touching  a  tenement,  to  wit, 
one  virgate  of  land,  two  acres  of  land,  and  two  messuages  with 
the  appurtenances  in  Wytton'  and  Glastifigebyr',does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  namely, 
Robert  son  of  Thomas  de  Drayton  and  Thomas  Martell.' 

435.  Stephen  Whytman,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor  against  Thomas  Chep  touching  two  messuages  with 
the  appurtenances  in  Cruk','  comes  and  withdraws.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  namely,  Hamo  the 
tailor  (le  parmenter)  and  John  de  Mandevill',  Stephen's  pledge 
for  his  amercement :  Thomas  Chapman. 

436.  The  a-ssizc  comes  to  recognise  whether  Nicholas  le 
Waleys,  father  of  Walter  le  Waley.s,  was  seised  in  his  demesne, 
etc.,  of  two  parts  of  half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances 
in  Chyrchehull  on  the  day,  etc.  And  whether,  etc.  Which  land 
William  de  Wellcslegh'  holds,  who  comes  and  vouches  to 
warranty  Agatha  de  Mesy.  Let  him  have  her  [present]  on  the 
morrow  of  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary  by  the  help  of 
the  court.  On  that  day  the  aforesaid  Agatha  does  not  come. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  assize  should  proceed  against 
her  in  default.  And  Roger  de  Cherleton,  one  of  the  recognitors, 
does  not  come.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors  say  that 
the  aforesaid  Nicholas  died  seised  of  the  aforesaid  land  with  the 
appurtenances,  and  after  the  time,"  etc.,  and  that  the  aforesaid 
Walter  is  his  next  heir.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Walter 
should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Agatha  is  in  mercy.  And  let 
William  recover  against  her  what  he  ought  to  have.  Afterwards 
the  aforesaid  Agatha  comes,  and  William  proffers  a  charter  of 
Agatha  herself,  which  testifies  that  shi;  gave  [the  landj  to  the 
aforesaid  William.     Afterwards  William  comes,  and  says  that  he 

'  Over  Ihe  latrer  name  is  wtilten  *'  nihil." 

*  Ciewketne.  '  i.i.,  of  limitation. 


144  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

does  not  wish  to  proceed  against  her.  Therefore  Agatha  [may 
go]  without  a  day,  and  William  is  in  mercy.  [The  amercement] 
is  pardoned  by  the  justices. 

437.  Richard  Keling,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor 
against  the  Abbot  of  Adthelingenye*  touching  three  acres  of 
land  and  one  acre  and  a  half  of  meadow  with  the  appurtenances 
in  Hammes,  does  not  prosecute.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute,  namely,  Richard  de  Henyiok'  and  William  Hakehel, 
are  in  mercy. 

438.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Cap'lla  father  of  Thopacia,  wife  of  William  Tropinel,  and  Joan, 
wife  of  Adam  Blund  {Blundus\  was  seised  in  his  demesne, 
etc.,  of  eight  acres  of  land  and  half  an  acre  of  meadow  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Pulton*  on  the  day,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc, 
which  land  and  which  meadow  Ro .  .  .  de  Cap'lla  holds,  who 
comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  Peter  de  Cap'lla,  who  is  present, 
and  warrants  him  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize 
should  remain.  And  Aubert  de  Lanyiete,  William  le  Flemeng*, 
and  Robert  le  Franc  of  Prestel,  three  of  the  recognitors,  are  in 
mercy  because  they  have  not  come,  etc.*  The  jurors  say  that  the 
aforesaid  Richard  de  Cap'lla  died  seised  of  the  aforesaid  eight 
acres  of  land  and  half  an  acre  of  meadow  with  the  appurtenances 
as  of  fee,  and  that  he  died  after  the  time,  etc.,  and  that  the  afore- 
said Topacia  and  Joan  are  his  next  heirs.  Therefore  it  is  con- 
sidered that  they,  Topacia  and  Joan,  should  recover  their  seisin, 
and  Peter  is  in  mercy  by  his  pledges,  Robert  de  Cap'lla  and 
Nicholas  de  Litleton.  And  let  an  exchange  be  made  to  Robert 
de  Cap'lla  to  the  value,  etc. 

439.  Joan  wife  of  WiUiam  de  Bonevill'  puts  in  her  place 
Stephen  de  Bonevill'  against  the  Prior  of  St.  James  of  Bristol 
And  against  John  de  Burgo  and  Hawise  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of 
land  and  on  a  plea  of  customs  and  service,  etc. 

440.  Lucy  de  Monte  Acuto  puts  in  her  place  Ralph  de 
Ferariis  against  Alice,  who  was  the  wife  of  John  Brane,  on  a 
plea  of  dower,  etc. 

441.  Our  lord  the  King  notified  the  justices  by  his  writ  that 
Robert  de  Marisco  had  attorned  before  him  in  his  place  Jordan 
de  Marisco  to  gain  or  to  lose  in  a  suit  summoned  before  our 
lord  the  King  by  his  writ  of  right  between  the  aforesaid  Robert, 

^  Athelney.  '  The  "  etc."  means  that  they  were  duly  summoned. 


SOUBRSETSniRE   PLEAS. 


145 


querent,  and  Walter  le  Page,  tenant  of  one  virgate  and  a  quarter 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Bobinton.  etc.' 

442.  Our  lord  the  King  notified  by  his  writ  that  he  had 
granted  and  confirmed  to  the  master  and  brethren  of  the 
Knights  Templars  in  England  the  liberties  and  immunities 
{iibtrtaUs  tt  guietattcias)  previously  [granted]  to  them  by 
his  predecessors,  kings  of  England,  to  which  he  had  made 
additions,  as  more  plainly  appears  by  his  charters  and  confirma- 
tions so  made  to  them.  And  therefore  he  commanded  the 
justices  that  his  aforesaid  charters  and  confirmations  be  read 
in  public  before  them,  and  that  they  should  cause  the  liberties 
and  immunities  granted  to  them  [the  Templars]  by  him  and  his 
predecessors  to  be  strictly  observed  according  to  the  tenor  of  his 
same  charters  and  confirmations.' 

44J.  The  Abbot  of  Cyrnecestr'  puts  in  his  place  brother 
Walter,  his  lay-brother  {conversum  suum),  or  Humphrey  de  la 
Barre  [gainst]  Richard  le  Bygod  on  a  plea  of  pasture,  etc.,  and 
against  Reginald  Byll  on  a  plea  of  land  utrum^  etc. 

444.  Beatrice  wife  of  Andrew  de  Stratton'  puts  in  her  place 
Andrew  her  husband  against  Henry  de  Hotekumb  and  Robert 
de  Percy,  on  a  plea  of  covenant  and  naifty,  etc." 

445.  Joan  wife  of  William  Braunche  puts  in  her  place 
Thomas  Trevet  against  Amabel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert 
Michel,  on  a  plea  of  custody,  etc.,  and  against  John  Wicun  on  a 
]}lea  of  customs  and  service,  etc. 

446.  Aubrey'  de  Halingele  puts  in  his  place  Richard  Trevet 
against  Richard  Telinge  on  a  plea  of  mort  d'anccstor,  etc. 

447.  Kmma  de  Blebir'  puts  in  her  place  Roger  de  Elebir" 
against  Roger  Utheinge  on  a  plea  of  mort  d'ancestor,  etc. 

Memb.  2. 

448.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  Gur- 
demere,  Richard  Coppe,  Adam  de  Haselbere,  Simon  de  Ham- 

'  The  suit  was  settled  by  a  fine,  levieil  al  WcsliDinster,  in  the  quindene  of  Easlei. 
See  "  Somctsel  Fines,"  p.  \li. 

'  A  umilu  Older  to  the  sherilT  o(  Ileieloid  in  1 1  Hen.  III.  is  given  in  "  Roi. 
Clans.,"  Vol.  ii,  p.  171.  He  was  direclcd  lo  read  Ihe  granis  in  his  counly  couil, 
utd  to  see  thai  Ihe  tibeities  of  the  Templars  in  his  bailliuick  were  ob&eived. 

*  See  '*  SomerscI  Fines,"  p.  lai.  ADdiew  and  hia  wife  acknowledged  Robert  de 
Percy  10  be  a  free  man  for  himself  and  his  heirs,  wilh  all  his  and  Iheir  households, 
U)d  qiul.cl3inied  foi  themselves  all  manner  of  ncifiy  and  servitude.     See  No.  535 . 

'  I  am  not  sute  of  this  name.  PoEsibly  it  may  be  the  Abbot  of  Halingctc,  a  slip 
for  Ihe  Prior  of  that  place. 


146  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

brigg',  and  Robert  Budde  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  William  Doylly 
of  his  free  tenement  in  Hambrigg'^  since  the  first  crossing,  etc., 
and  upon  which  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  seven 
acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances.  And  Thomas  Gurdemer, 
Simon  de  Hambrig',  and  Robert  Budde  do  not  come.  Therefore 
let  the  assize  proceed  against  them  by  default  They  were  not 
attached,  and  they  were  found.  Therefore  Richard  Coppe  the 
bailiff  is  in  mercy.^  And  Richard  Coppe  and  Adam  de  Hasel- 
ber'  come,  and  allege  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain. 
The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  William  Doylli  and  one  Ralph 
his  servant  demised  that  land  to  the  aforesaid  Thomas  to  hold 
to  farm  for  six  years,  and  he  was  seised  thereof  for  two  years, 
so  that  in  the  third  year  the  aforesaid  William  came  and  wished 
to  take  back  the  land  to  himself,  and  Thomas  would  not  permit 
him,  and  they  did  not  otherwise  disseise  him  [William].  Where- 
fore they  say  that  they  did  not  disseise  him.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Thomas  and  the  others  [may  go]  without  a  day, 
and  William  is  in  mercy  by  his  pledges  for  his  false  claim. 

449.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  le 
Frankelain  unjustly,  etc.,  obstructed  a  certain  road  in  Huverfake- 
ford'  to  the  injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Luke  de  LuneSchaft, 
in  Netherfakeford'  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And  William 
comes  and  alleges  nothing  against  the  assize,  but  he  says  that  he 
obstructed  no  road  to  the  injury,  etc.,  and  he  fully  concedes  [that] 
the  assize  [may  proceed].  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid 
William  obstructed  no  road  to  the  injury,  etc.,  and  therefore  it  is 
considered  that  William  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Luke  is  in 
mercy  for  his  false  claim. 

450.  The  same  Luke,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
against  John  de  Reungny  and  others  in  the  writ  shown  touch- 
ing a  tenement  in  Fakeford*,  comes  and  withdraws  himself. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  John  le 
Franceys  of  Fakeford'  and  John  le  Frankelan  of  the  same, 
are  in  mercy.  Luke's  pledges  for  the  amercement  are  Robert 
de  Wheteden'  and  Geoffry  de  Wyly. 

451.  Roger  Whytheng',  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Thomas  de  Berton'  and  others  in  the  writ  shown 
concerning  the  throwing  down  of  a  certain  dyke  in  Katikote*  to 

*  Hambridge. 

'  Because  he  did  not  lake  steps  to  have  them  attached,  when  he  could  not  say 
that  he  could  not  find  them.  '  Catcott  in  Moorlinch. 


f 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  I47 

the  injury  of  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill,  comes  and  with- 
draws himself.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledge  to  prosecute, 
namely,  Reginald  le  Gentil.  is  in  mercy.  Roger's  pledges  for  the 
amercement  [are]  Roger  Bilhok  of  Caldekote  and  Walter  Lost 
of  the  same. 

452.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise   whether  Reginald   de 

Moyun,  Walter  de  Badehuir,  and  Hamelin  Bun  disseised  William 

de  Pyrho  of  his  free  tenement  in  Duvreye  since  the  first,  etc. 

And  Reginald  de  Moyun  does  not  come,  and  he  was  attached  by 

Philip  de  la  Marshe  and  Thomas  de  la  Marshe.    Therefore  they 

are   in  mercy.      And    Hamelin   was   attached   by   Richard   le 

Bedel  of  Cudinton'  and  Walter  the  carter  {Carrectarius)  of  the 

same.      And   Walter   was   attached    by  Walter  the   reeve  of 

Cudinton*  and  Robert  Russel  of  the  same.     Therefore  they  are 

in  mercy.     Afterwards  William  de  Pirho  comes  and  withdraws 

himself      Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely, 

William  Rusel  of  Stanton'  and  Adam   de  Liddon'  in  Brune- 

londe,  are  in  mercy.    William's  pledges  for  his  amercement  are : 

Richard  son  of  Matthew  de  Lince  and  Richard  son  of  Richard 

de  Cludesham. 

453.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Stephen  le 
Punter  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  William  de  Oyly'  of  his  common 
of  pasture  in  Hambrugg',^  which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free 
tenement  in  the  same  vill,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And 
Stephen  does  not  come,  and  he  was  not  attached  because  he  was 
not  found.  Therefore  let  the  assize  proceed  against  him  by 
default.  And  Alan  de  Furnyaus,  one  of  the  recognitors,  comes 
and  says  that  he  made  no  view  of  that  pasture  nor  was  he 
summoned.  And  it  is  proved  by  the  sheriff  and  the  bailiffs  that 
he  was  summoned.  Therefore  Alan  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors 
say  that  the  aforesaid  Stephen  disseised  the  aforesaid  William 
Doyli  of  the  aforesaid  common  of  pasture,  as  the  writ  alleges. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William  should  recover  his  seisin 
of  the  said  common  by  view  of  the  recognitors,  and  Stephen  is 
in  mercy.     Damages,  6d, 

454.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Eadin'  de 
Gavelbrug',  father  of  Ralph,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  of  half 
a  virgate  of  land  and  of  half  of  one  mill,  with  the  appurtenances 
in  Kingesbyr',  on  the  day,  etc.  And  whether  he  died  since  the 
last  return  our  lord    King  John  from    Ireland  into   England. 

*  liambridge. 


148  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

And  whether,  etc.,  which  land  and  mill  John  Love  and  Isabella 
his  wife  hold,  who  come  and  allege  nothing  wherefor  the  assize 
should  remain.  And  William  de  Clavill*,  one  of  the  rea^jnitors, 
does  not  come.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors  say  that 
the  aforesaid  Eadin',  father  of  Ralph,  died  seised  of  the  aforesaid 
half  virgate  of  land  and  half  of  the  mill  as  of  fee,  and  that  the 
said  Ralph  is  his  next  heir,  and  that  the  aforesaid  Edin'  died 
since  the  time  aforesaid.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Ralph 
should  recover  his  seisin,  and  John  and  Isabella  are  in  mercy 
by  their  pledges,  John  of  Lambrok'  and  John  Eustach'  of  the 
same. 

455.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  le 
Frankelain,  father  of  Richard,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc,  of 
one  ferling  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Aldweir,  on  the 
day,  etc.  And  whether,  etc.,  which  land  Agnes  de  Munketon* 
holds,  who  comes  and  fully  confesses  that  Richard,  the  father  of 
him,  Richard,  died  seised  of  the  aforesaid  land  as  of  fee,  and 
that  he,  Richard,  is  his  next  heir,  and  that  she  claims  nothing  in 
that  land  except  custody  thereof,  because  the  aforesaid  Richard 
the  father,  touching  whose  death  the  assize  is  arraigned,  held  of 
her  by  knight  service.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Richard 
should  take  nothing  by  that  assize  and  should  be  in  mercy  for 
his  false  claim  by  his  pledges,  Hamo  of  the  Garden  {de  Gardino) 
and  Jollin'  of  the  Mill.* 

456.  The  assize  comes  to  realise  whether  Alwina  de 
Perton',  kinswoman  (arnica^)  of  Isabella,  wife  of  Nicholas  de 
Vreviir,  was  seised  in  her  demesne  as  of  fee  of  three  ferlings  of 
land,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Perton',  on  the  day,  etc  And 
whether,  etc,  whereof  Henry  Lude  and  Justina  his  wife  hold 
two  parts  and  Odo  de  Dyril'  and  Risidina  his  wife  hold  the 
third  part.  They  come,  and  Odo  and  Risidina,  on  their  part, 
vouch  to  warranty  the  aforesaid  Henry  and  Justina,  who  are 
present,  and  warrant  them,  and  say  that  the  assize  oi^ht  not  to 
be  made  because  the  aforesaid  Isabella,  who  arraigns  the  assize, 

'  RkhiLrd  the  son,  who  chums,  must  have  been  under  age.  Ag;nes  snbstamtiates 
her  right  to  hold  the  land  during  his  infiuiqr.  An  in£uit  cookl  sue,  and  he  sued  in 
his  proper  person,  for  he  could  not  appoint  an  attorney.  No  doubt  a  friend  often 
acted  foi  him. 

'  Equiralent  to  farms^  according  to  Dncange  Gloss.  But  the  word  may  be 
read  as  "  amita^^*  the  letters  c  and  /  being  olten  indistingui^iable  in  this  roO.  For 
^' ami/a '*  read  ^^ /ofris  sfrvr^"  according  to  Lyttelton*s  Latin  Diet.  See  mho 
No.  596  /^/,  where  the  word  clearly  has  swch  meaning. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


149 


had  a  certain  firstborn  sister,  FeSicia  by  name,  who  had  two 
daughters.  Margery  and  loienta,  who  have  the  same  right  in  the 
land  as  Isabella  herself.  And  Isabella  and  Nicholas  are  not 
able  to  deny  tliis.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Henry  and 
Justirja  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Nicholas  and  Isabella  are 
in   mercy  for  their  false  claim.     Let  them  bt;  in  custody. 

457.  Robert  de   la  Lude   and  Avicc  his  wife,  William  de 

Boneviir  and  Alice   his  wife,  were   summoned   to  answer  the 

Prior  of  St.  James  of  Bristoll'  on  a  plea  that  they  should  render 

to  him  6cu.  which  they  are  in  arrear  to  the  prior  in  respect  of 

an     annual  rent  of  20s.,  and  wherein  it  is  claimed  that  by  such 

detention  he  is  injured  and  has  incurred  damage  to  the  value  of 

^G,  a^nd  he  produces  suit,  etc.     And  Robert  and  the  others  come 

^n<i    say  that  when  the  aforesaid  prior  by  his  writ  seeks  20s.  and 

'"    t^  is  pleading  claims  6ai.,  and  so  varies  in  his  pleading  from  his 

**'*"»*,   it  seems  they  ought  not  to  answer  him.     And  because  it  is 

P*^c»'V.*cd  that  he  so  varies  it  is  considered  that  Robert  and  the 

othcixs  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  the  prior  is  in  mercy  by  his 

P'^«J.£e.     Let  him  be  in  custody.' 

— ,  -^58.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Peter  de 
■*^^""*-»"ieweir  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Hugh  de  la  Pcsse  of  his  free 
'^*^<iment  in  Pesse  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And  it  is  com- 
P;^i.  Tied  that  he  disseised  him  [Hugh]  of  a  certain  dyke  which  v 


Kis 


free  court  (soiium%  and  that  the  same  Peter  appropriated  to 


^*-"^*^self  that   dyke.      And    Peter   comes   and   alleges    nothing 

^?f^"*^rcfor  the  assize  should  remain,  and  he  fully  concedes  [that] 

^^'-^i   assize  [may  proceed].     The  jurors  say  that  the   aforesaid 

*^'&tcr  disseised  the  aforesaid  Hugh  of  the  said  dyke  as  the  writ 

^^i-'s,  because,  they  say,  that  the  whole  of  the  dyke  belongs  to 

~^  Vigh.     Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Hugh  should  recover 

*?*s  seisin,  and    Peter   is   in   mercy.     Let  him   be  in   custody. 

**lcdges  for  Peter's  amercement :  Richard  de  Vynar'  of  Haretrowe 

^1d  Gilbert  de  la  Landsare.     Damages,  2s. 

459.  Ralph  son  of  Ralph,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort 
<i' ancestor  against  Richard  son  of  Ralph  touching  half  a  virgatc 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances,  except  ten  acres  in  Heleworthy,' 
comes  and  withdraws  himself.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely,  Warin  de  Helleworthy  and  William  de  Sterne- 


1  11  (S  "  in  ihe  margin. 

*  vta.     See  Ducangc  Gloss., 

*  Elworlhy. 


'  lelio  seu  tHriili," 


f50  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


wayc,  arc  in  mercy.     Ralph's  pledge  for  his  amercement :  Roger 
dc  la  Pole, 

460.  Cecily  daughter  of  Walter,  who  brought  a  writ  of  novel 
disseisin  touching  a  free  tenement  in  Edinton'  against  Walter 
son  of  Gcoffry,  and  others,  in  the  writ  shown,  comes  and 
withdraws  herself  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely,  Henry  dc  Stcrta  and  Richard  Crul,  are  in  mercy. 
Cecily's  pledges  for  the  amercement :  Henry  de  Chamflur  and 
Adam  dc  Lond*. 

461.  The  Prior  of  Goldklive  puts  in  his  place  Hugh  de 
Crandon'  against  William  de  Maris  on  a  plea  of  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor,  etc. 

462.  The  Prior  of  Bath  puts  in  his  place  Henry  de  Chaverton 
against  Walter  Whythtlak  and  Christiana  his  wife  on  a  plea  of 
land,  etc.     And  against  John  de  Champflur  on  a  plea 

463.  Agnes  wife  of  John  de  Aura  puts  in  her  place  Gilbert  le 
Daneys  against  E  .  .  .  Cherl  .  .  .  on  a  plea    .    .    } 

464.  Ingerctta,  who  was  the  wife  of  William  de  Rengny,puts 
in  her  place  Gcrvase  de  la  Thorre  against  R  .  .  .  chaplain  of 
Carlcton  on  a  plea  of  land.* 

465.  Ralph  Russel  puts  in  his  place  Henry  son  of  Walter 
against  William  dc  Capello  and  Isabella  his  mother  on  a  plea 
of  warranty  of  charter,  etc. 

466.  Juliana  dc  Preston*  puts  in  her  place  Gregory  de  Stokes 
against  Nicholas  dc  Bosco  and  Agnes  his  wife  and  William  son 
of  Alice  on  a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

467.  William  de  la  Hull  is  in  mercy  for  his  foolish  speech 
{stultiloquio)  and  untruth.*** 

Memb,  2d. 

468.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de  la 
Mare,  Ralph  dc  Angers,  and  Gilbert  Grafenloyl  unjustly,  etc^ 
disseised  Nicholas  [son  of?]  Michael  of  his  common  of  pasture 
in  Chcrlcton',  which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free  tenement  in  the 
same  vill,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.,  whereon  it  is  complained 
that  when  he  [Nicholas]  ought  by  right  of  inheritance  to  bars  a 

*  The  roll  is  ilK^iblc  in  places  here,  but  it  would  appear  from  a  fiae  set  eat  ia 
*•  Somerset  Fines,"  }>.  117,  that  the  claimant  was  Eva  de  Chorlegfae. 

^  The  whole  of  this  entry  is  struck  out  and  a  marginal  noce  *"  xmUi  ^  1  at^  » 
written. 

^  See  No.  320.  ar.te.     Qtutn^  should  it  read  **  foolish  suit  *^  inceid  of  **  faoGah 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAis  15^ 


fifth  part  of  the  whole  of  the  aforesaid  pasture  the  said  Hcnr^* 
and  ibe  others  deforce  him  of  that  pasture,  and  when  he  ought  to 
have  sixteen  oxen  in  the  pasture  the  said  Henn-  and  the  others 
do  not  allow  him,  etc  And  Henr>'  and  Gilbert  do  not  come ; 
bat  Ralph  dc  Angers,  Henr>-'s  bailiff,  comes  and  answers  for 
Henr>-  and  Gilbert,  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  held, 
because,  he  sa\-s,  that  wherever  Henn*  and  the  others  use  that 
pasture  the  aforesaid  Nicholas  may  have  common,  and  he  is  in 
seisin  thereof.  Moreover,  they  say  that  Amabel,  the  mother  of 
Nicholas,  holds  the  aforesaid  fifth  part  of  the  said  pasture  cis  her 
dower,  and  is  in  seisin  thereof.  And  Nicholas  cannot  deny  this. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Henr\-  and  the  others  [may  go] 
without  a  day,  and  Nicholas  is  in  mercy  by  his  pledges  :  Gilbert 
[son  of?  ]  Michael  and  Robert  de  Blakford'. 

469.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de  Gaunt 
unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  William  de  Polet  of  his  common  of 
pasture  in  Hammes  which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in 
Polet,*  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And  it  is  complained  that 
when  each  of  them  ought  to  have  common  with  the  other  in 
his  lands  in  the  aforesaid  vill,  after  the  carrying  off  of  the  crops, 
the  same  Henry  docs  not  allow,  etc.  And  Henry  comes  and 
says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  held,  because  the  truth  is 
that  William  never  had  common  in  that  pasture,  unless  at  the 
time  when  he  was  bailiff  of  the  said  Henry,  nor  had  he  any  land 
for  which  he  ought  to  have  common,  beyond  two  acres  of  land 
which  his  ancestors  gave  to  William,  and  so  much  common 
as  appertains  to  such  land  he  fully  concedes  to  him  [William], 
and  that  otherwise  he  has  not  disseised  him,  and  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that  in  truth  the  land  of  Henry 
in  Hammes  and  the  land  of  William  in  Polet  arc  in  different 
baronies.  They  say  that  the  ancestors  of  Henry  and  William 
were  always  accustomed  to  have  common  in  the  said  lands,  to 
wit,  each  of  them  in  the  land  of  the  other  from  the  feast  of 
Michaelmas  to  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary,  and  they 
(stc)  likewise  until  Henry  disseised  him.  Wherefore  they  posi- 
tively say  that  the  aforesaid  Henry  unjustly  disseised  William, 
as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William  .should 
recover  his  seisin  in  the  aforesaid  pasture,  and  Henry  is  in  mercy. 
Damages,  12^/. 

1  Pawlct 


152  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

470.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Gilbert  le 
Norreys,  uncle  of  Alice,  wife  of  Philip  Hubert,  and  of  Cecily,  wife 
of  William  Hereward,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  three  fer- 
lings  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Tylterne  on  the  day  on 
which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  of  which  William  de  Hewenesbar* 
holds  two  ferlings  and  David  de  Tylterne  one  ferling.  And 
David  does  not  come,  but  William  de  Heweneb'gh  comes  and 
voluntarily  (gratis)  warrants  the  said  David,  and  answers  for 
the  whole,  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  held  because 
Gilbert,  upon  whose  death  the  assize  is  arraigned,  died  before 
the  time  shown  in  the  writ,  to  wit,  before  the  last  return  of  King 
John  from  Ireland  into  England,^  and  thereon  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  And  William  Fossard',  one  of  the  jurors,  is  in 
mercy  for  his  transgression.  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid 
Gilbert  le  Norreis  died  seised  of  the  aforesaid  three  ferlings  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances,  and  that  he  died  since  the  time, 
and  that  the  aforesaid  Alice  and  Cecily  are  his  next  heirs. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Alice  and  Cecily  should  recover 
their  seisin,  and  William  de  Hewenbar'  is  in  mercy  by  his 
pledges :  John  de  Cinnok'  and  GeofTry  de  Heweneben*  And 
let  an  exchange  to  the  value  of  one  ferling  of  land  be  made  to 
the  aforesaid  Da\id,  etc. 

471.  Margery*  daughter  of  John  de  W^orhes,  who  brought 
an  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  a^^ainst  John  de  la  Cumb*  touching 
four  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Seleworh',*  does 
not  prosecute.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely,  Adam  de  Liddon'  and  Richard  de  Fonte,  are  in  mercy. 

472.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Prior  of 
Bokland',  Jocelin  de  Halse,  Reginald  de  Monte,  Hugh  Griffin, 
Robert  in  Paver*,  Elyas  Blund  {blii9idus\  Adam  de  Middeld', 
William  de  Middeldon*,  and  Ralph  de  Middeld'  unjustly, 
etc..  disseised  Nicholaha  de  Champflur**  of  her  free  tenem^t 
in  Hewyse,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.,  wherein  it  is  com- 
plained that  they  disseised  her  of  seven  acres  and  a  half. 
And  the  Prior  comes  and  answers  as  bailiff  for  all  of  the  others, 
and  says  that  they  did  not  disseise  her  of  any  free  tenement, 
and  he  fully  concedes  [that]  the  assize  [may  be  made].     And 

^  That  is  the  period  of  UmitAtioo  of  actions  of  this  kind.     It  «-ill  be  nodoed  tbat 
this  plea  foiled,  and  William  had  to  make  good  one  ierlii]^  to  DarkL 
-  Ovei  this  name  is  written  '*«***/  ** 
*  Selworthy.  *  See  No.  380, 


153 

Nicholas  de  Meryct,  Robert  le  Bel,  Stephen  de  Welinton', 
Richard  de  Albo  Monasterio','  John  Selvayn,  William  de 
Lumeny,  Daniel  de  Esse,  jurors,  are  in  mercy  because  they  do 
not  come.  And  the  assize  is  put  in  respite  until  the  morrow 
of  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary  for  the  default  of  the 
recognitors.  And  the  sheriff  is  not  notified  that  in  the  mean- 
time, etc.  The  jurors  say"  Afterwards  the  aforesaid 
Nichola  comes  and  withdraws  herself,  as  appears  elsewhere  in 
the  roll.* 

473.  Christiana  daughter  of  Robert,  who  brought  an  assize 
of  mort  d'ancestor  against  William  Haket  concerning  sixteen 
acres  of  land  and  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Camel,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely,  Her  .  .  .  Pamer  and  Reginald  de 
Cumbe,  are  in  mercy.  And  because  Henry  the  clerk  and 
William  Barat,  the  bailiff  of  the  hundred  of  Camel,  testify  that 
Christiana  Is  dead,  and  the  jurors  of  the  assise  testify  that  she  is 
alive,  and  that  they  [the  parties]  have  come  to  an  agreement, 
therefore  they  [Henry  and  William]  are  in  mercy.  F'ledges  of 
William  Barat:  Robert  de  la  Putte  and  Geoffry  de  Wylcghc.' 

474-  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Middciton'  and  Gunnilda  his  wife  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised 
Juliana  daughter  of  William  of  her  free  tenement  in  Clive, 
since  the  first  crossing,  etc.,  and  concerning  which  it  is  com- 
plained that  he  disseised  her  of  one-third  part  of  two  ferlings 
of  land.  And  Richard  and  Gunnilda  come  and  allege  nothing 
wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  Therefore  let  the  assize 
proceed.  And  Henry  de  Craudon'  and  William  de  Craudon, 
two  recognitors,  are  in  mercy  because  they  do  not  come.  The 
jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Richard  and  Gunnilda  disseised 
the  aforesaid  Juliana  of  the  said  third  part  of  two  ferlings  of 
land,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  she 
should  recover  her  seisin  by  view  of  the  jury,  and  Richard  is  in 
mercy.     Let  him  be  in  custody.     Damages,  ^  mark, 

475.  William  de  Hereford,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor  against  William  son  of  Walter  de  Polet  touching  a 
tenement  in  Polet,'  comes  and  withdraws  himself.     Therefore 

'  Whiichurch. 

'  Heie  Ihe  clerk  breaks  off,  Iraving  Space  for  the  finding  at  a  fulure  date. 

*  See  No.  539. 

*  In  the  mirgui  is  ihe  word  "  gayol,"  Mruck  out.  '  PaHlel. 


154  .     SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Stephen  Teysun  and 
Elyas  Waukelin,  are  in  mercy.  William's  pledges  for  his  amerce- 
ment :  Philip  de  Sidenham  and  Robert  Attegrave. 

476.  Thomas  son  of  Walter,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort 
d*ancestor  against  Walter  de  la  Ford  touching  ten  acres  of  land 
and  one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Clopton*,  comes 
and  withdraws  himself.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  pro- 
secute, namely,  Godfrey  de  Winkauelton  and  William  Legegod', 
are  in  mercy,  etc. 

477.  William  son  of  John  Young  {juvenis)  of  Axebrig'  gives 
^  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with  Henry  son  of  David  con- 
cerning a  plea  of  land  by  pledge  of  Henry  son  of  David  of 
Axebrig.* 

478.  Henry*  Malherbe,  who  brought  a  writ  of  entry  against 
Nicholas  de  Cuntevill'  concerning  half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Wademore,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Colin  de  Litleton  and 
William  de  Hardinton',  are  in  mercy. 

479.  Thomas  de  Cirnecestr'  the  younger  puts  in  his  place 
John  Bate  against  Robert  son  of  John  and  Robert  son  of  Gode 
.     .     .     [Godfrey  ?]  upon  a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

480.  Alice  wife  of  Martin  de  Legh  puts  in  her  place  Martin 
her  husband  against  Ralph  Hose  and  Eva  his  wife  upon  a  plea 
of  warranty  of  charter,  etc. 

481.  Agnes  wife  of  Roger  de  Kalemondeston'  puts  in  her 
place  Roger  her  husband  against  John  de  Cappen  on  a  plea  of 
assize  in  which  complaining,  etc. 

482.  Amabel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  Michel,  puts  in 
her  place  Gilbert  her  son  against  William  Branche  and  Joan  his 
wife  on  a  plea  of  custody,  etc.  And  against  Nicholas  son  of 
Humphrey  and  Reginald  his  brother  on  a  plea  of  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor.  And  against  Richard  de  Cumb'  on  a  plea  of 
land,  etc. 

Memh,  3. 

483.  Agnes  de  Baialton,  who  brought  a  writ  of  novel  disseisin 
against  William  de  Oreweye  concerning  a  tenement  in  Badialton, 
does  not  proceed.     Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute 

'  Sec  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  120,  where  William  is  called  "  le  Jovenc." 
*  Over  this  name  is  written  **«iV^i7." 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  155 

are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Henry  de  Hedenbir*,  and  the  sheriff  must 
answer  for  the  other  [pledge]. 

484.  The  Abbot  of  Cyrnecestr',  who  brought  a  writ  against 
Reginald  Byle  whether  one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Meleburn'  be  in  free-alms,  etc.,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Robert  de  Uraycote  and 
Ralph  Dubel,  are  in  mercy,  etc. 

485.  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Ralph  son  of  Robert, 
seeks  against  John  de  Reiny  a  third  part  of  twenty  acres  of 
land,  and  of  twenty  acres  of  wood  and  marsh,  and  of  one  water- 
mill,  and  of  four  ferlings  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Radeflet  as  her  dower,  etc.  And  John  comes  and  vouches  to 
warranty  the  Prior  of  Berlyz,^  who  is  present,  and  warrants  him, 
and  vouches  to  warranty  Hugh  son  of  Robert.  Let  him  [the 
Prior]  have  him  [Hugh]  on  Wednesday  next  after  the  Purifica- 
tion of  the  Blessed  Mary  by  help  of  the  court.  The  sheriff  is 
notified,  etc.* 

486.  The  same  seeks  against  Henry  de  Fonte  a  third  part  of 
one  ferling  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  HalesweU'^  as  her 
dower,  etc.  And  Henry  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  the 
aforesaid  Hugh.  Let  him  [Henry]  have  him  at  the  same  time 
by  help  of  the  court,  etc.  The  sheriff  is  notified.  And  be  it 
known  that  the  writ  should  remain  with  the  sheriff.  Afterwards 
Henry  comes  and  gives  up  to  Matilda  one-third  part  of  fifteen 
acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  as  her  dower,  and  Matilda 
holds  herself  content.  And  Henry  is  in  mercy  by  pledge, 
because  he  did  not  give  it  up  before.  Afterwards  they  are 
agreed  by  licence.  And  the  Prior  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  by  pledge.* 

487.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de  Gant 
unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Jordan  de  Alkcsy  of  his  common  of 
pasture  in  Hammcs,  which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free  tenement 
in  Alkesye,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And  Henry  comes  and 
says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because  he  says  that 
he  claims  nothing  in  that  pasture  except  what  Maurice  de  Gant 
had  there,  and  the  Bishop  of  Bath,  etc..  [and]  our  lord  the  King 
whilst  it  was  in  his  hand,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the 

'  Barlynch. 

'  This  suit  was  settled  by  a  fine.     See  "Somerset  Fines,"  pp.  119-20. 
"  Halswell. 

*  The  loiter  part  of  this  entry,  relating  to  th^  fine,  would  appear  to  be  misplaced. 
ought  to  have  been  written  after  the  preceding  entry. 


156  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS 

assize.  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Henry  disseised  the 
aforesaid  Jordan  of  the  said  common,  as  the  writ  says.  There- 
fore it  is  considered  that  Jordan  should  recover  his  seisin  of  the 
said  pasture  by  view  of  the  recognitors.  And  Henry  is  in 
merc\\  Afterwards  the  said  Henrj'  de  Gant  comes  and  gives 
5  marks  to  ha\-e  jl  jury  of]  twenty-four  to  con\'ict  the  twelve, 
by  the  pledges  o?  \VtlIiam  Orewell  and  Richard  de  Draykote, 
etc*     Damages.  12^. 

4SC5.  John  son  of  Agnes  de  la  Radeklive  of  the  suburb  of 
Bristoir.  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort  d*ancestor  against  John 
le  >[ire  and  Mati^oa  his  wife  and  Thomas  de  T>Tnbben*-e  con- 
cerning a  rent  of  4Cb\  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  suburb  of 
Bnscoir.  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely,  Walter  brother  of  William  de  Draykote  and 
Henrv  de  Dravkot\  are  in  mercv. 

4:^9.  Robert  de  Chand  s^  essoniator  of  the  Abbot  of  Ke\'Tisham, 
offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day  against  William  de  Holecumbe 
on  a  plea  of  half  the  mar^?r  of  Holecumb*  with  the  appurtenances, 
except  the  ad^vwson  of  the  chapel  of  Hoiecxmibe.  seven  ferlings 
and  tbrt\--one  acres  of  I^nd.  four  messua^^es,  jf.  of  rent,  three 
acres  of  wi.vxl  anvi  two  mil's,  etc  And  William  does  not  come, 
and  he  was  sought,  etc  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the 
Abbot  *may  go]  without  a  day.  and  Wt'Iiam  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute,  namely.  Jocn  vfc  La  Cliii-e  and  Samptsoa'  de  Norton, 
are  in  mercw 

490.  Nichctos  de  E»oeco  and  Apies  his  wiie  and  WTJiam  son 

'  one  raoicty  of 

part  of  half  a 

Eststrepeston'.     And 

j:st   W:ll:an   oe   Lan^ebrok'  a  mc«ec>-  of  tJro  and  a  half 


m*  leTLStti  'cn  r*  i  unr  ,*i  r^-ssrv-.-inir.     tr  rjaT3Lt«!*>i  j»  i.  aiSi  -«n  :aey  Me  ii^ei eit 
riimscii*-     I:  -le-r  -^ah  *ri>  ;ii£  -  £irx«.iis  "*  acme  ixicmr  s  fJ*:w^  -'t>«rT^  "^nc  jn  mr}*^ 

r^srjipi:  -r*  :s  i  ?er7»  iso^jc  laii  Kfit-r-irri  jte  -atsc-n  sctanaiM  n  :ae  x^pMvd  wet: 
■•:r    r    .vn    :c.;^l.i3  iaii  rue  :3w«iisc!vt-j  u.*vo  i  ■^•■:\:z.  tecnta-   r^ulii   iiscuDr  ac 
3i:r -ne  rue '-lo;  i    x— .-;;   rcM  tcc   .*e  inuxcj*;  *■:>  i  ■  :'^r:   .:  -.^r'z    vncVtac  zi 
'^  !>r.n..-Ti<ir  :.   :.    ^*      S-r;    *  H>c   :f  iasr*  ls»."'«    ..    ..    ;•■.  5^:.  r^:.  xjxi  2CL. 
3 1-    :>  -■.  irir;  ■::«  ■v.r:^  t:.c^c  ^uc  ic-;jjii"^  :n  in;- ;».*«:-  ?  ii\.  v.:::;  m-Tirnii  i»Tenev-r 

•3e  :r  OSS'. line*  -n  -*«  :-"u>nr.  mk  N  :.  J^JT 
:3c  i>uxe  *  wr'.tTsa  *'  «b.  *«?*-.  * 


.SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 57 

^*i  rgates  of  land  and  of  a  third  part  of  half  a  virgate  of  land  with 

le  appurtenances  in  the  same  vill.     And  against  Juliana,  who 

as  the  wife  of  Rc^er  Thorel,  a  moiety  of  half  a  virgate  and  of 

^>iie-third  part  of  half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances 

im  the  same  vill,  of  which  Rocsia,  formerly  the  wife  of  Roger 

"iTiorel,  mother  of  the  aforesaid  Agnes  and  aunt  {arnica^)  of 

^lie  aforesaid  William,  whose  heirs  they  are,  was  seised  in  her 

demesne  as  of  fee  on  the  day  she  died.      Afterwards   comes 

'^^illiam  son  of  Alice,  and  says  that  he  does  not  wish  to  sue, 

>Vnd  Roger  Thorel  comes,  and  is  under  age,  and  says  that  Roger 

liis  father  died  seised  of  the   aforesaid   land  which  is  sought 

sgainst  him,  as  of  fee,  and  of  the  gift  of  John  Mariscall*,  and 

lie  proffers  the  charter  of   feoffment   of  the   aforesaid   John, 

^^hich  testifies  this.     Therefore  let  [Nicholas]  wait  as  against 

liim  [Rc^er]  until  he  is  of  full  age.*    And  William  de  Langcbrok' 

comes ;  and  as  to  the  whole  of  the  land  sought  against  him, 

except  of  the  half  virgate,  he  vouches  to  warranty  the  aforesaid 

Roger  Thorel,  who  is  under  age.     Therefore  let  it  wait  until 

he  attains  full  age.     And  touching  the  half  virgate  of  land,  he 

vouches  to  warranty  Richard  son  of  William  de  Wyk*.     Let 

him  have  him  on  Wednesday  next  after  the  Purification  of  the 

Blessed  Mary  by  help  of  the  court.     The  sheriff  is  notified,  etc. 

And  Juliana  vouches  to  warranty  the  aforesaid  Roger  Thorel 

who  is  under  age.     Therefore  let  it  wait  until  he  attain  full  age, 

etc      And  Agnes  puts  in  her  place  Nicholas  her  husband.      On 

the  day  aforesaid  the  aforesaid  Richard  son  of  William  comes 

and  warrants   and   vouches   to  warranty  the   aforesaid    Roger 

Thorel  who  is  under  age.     Therefore,  as  before,  let  it  wait  until 

his  full  age.* 

491.  Nicholas*  son  of  Robert,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty 

>  I  think  that  this  word  may  perhaps  be  read  as  amita.  See  ante  No.  456  : 
Qmmrt^  Was  Alice  »ister  to  Roesia  ? 

*  An  infant  defendant  usually  appeared  with  his  guardian,  who  often  had  an 
interesL  Sometimes  the  infant  had  merely  a  guardian  ad  litem,  bometimes,  as  in 
thii  case,  he  appeared  without  any  guardian,  although  most  proliably  he  had  some 
1ml  adviser.  The  infancy  of  an  heir  of  a  person  who  died  seised  .is  of  fee,  had  the 
effect  of  suspending  all  proceedings  against  him  in  a  proprietary'  action,  even  in  a 
cue  where  the  plaintiff  might  have  recovered  against  the  ancestor,  until  he  attained 
his  majority  (*'  Hist,  of  Engl.  Law,"  Vol.  ii.  pp.  440-441).  Here  Roger's  plea  of 
infuKy  suspended  the  proceedings  against  him ;  and  the  other  defendants,  by  vouching 
Idm  to  warrant  them,  also  succeetlcd  for  the  same  reason  in  delaying  the  plaintiiis. 

'  In  the  margin  is  the  word  **  Etas.'* 

*  Over  this  name  is  written  *'  alibi.** 


158  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

• 

of  charter  against  Richard  de  Mucengros  concerning  one  virgate 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Horsinton',  comes  and  with- 
draws himself  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely, 
Gilbert  Michel  and  Geoffry  de  Sigewell,  are  in  mercy,  etc 

492.  Adam  le  Waleys,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  dis- 
seisin against  the  Prior  of  St  Suithun'  of  Winton'  concerning 
a  free  tenement  in  Horton',  comes  and  withdraws  himsel£ 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy.  He 
made  fine  for  himself  and  his  pledges  in  2ar.  by  his  pledges 
Geoffry  Vassal  and  Robert  Mariscair. 

493.  Roesia  de  Tunemereton*  puts  in  her  place  Geoffry  le 
Bastard'  against  Richard  de  la  Ryvere  on  a  plea  of  land,  etc 

494.  Agnes  wife  of  Gervase  de  Hampton  puts  in  her  place 
Gervase  against  James  de  Chiffindon'  on  a  plea  of  a  reasonable 
part,  etc 

495.  Amabel  wife  of  Robert  de  Chaundoys  puts  in  her 
place  Robert  her  husband  against  Adam  de  Ayston'  on  a  plea 
of  novel  disseisin,  etc 

Memb,  3^/. 

496.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Jollam, 
father  of  Roger,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc,  of  four  ferlings 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Brumstert*  on  the  day  on 
which,  etc,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  Geoffry  de  Cotenor'* 
holds,  who  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made, 
because  he,  Roger,  was  himself  in  seisin  of  that  land  after  the 
death  of  the  aforesaid  William  his  father,  so  that  Roger  did 
homage  to  him  [Geoffry]  for  the  same  land,  and  held  it  of  him 
Geoffry,  and  afterwards  Roger  sold  to  Geoffry  the  aforesaid 
land,  and  has  made  his  charter  thereof  And  being  asked  at 
what  time  Roger  made  the  said  charter  to  Geoffry,  he  says  that 
thirteen  years  ago  he  made  the  charter  to  him.  And  Roger  is 
seen,  and  it  is  testified  that  he  was  under  age  when  the  charter 
was  made.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Roger  should  recover 
his  seisin,  and  that  Geoffry  is  in  grave  mercy.'     Let  him  be  in 

'  Broomstreet,  near  Culbone.  '  Kilnor  or  Culbone. 

'  The  expression  **i«  firavt  misericordia"  is  unusual.  It  shows  how  seriously 
Geoffry's  conduct  in  obtaining  a  charter  from  nn  infant  and  so  depriving  him  of  his 
seisin  was  regarded.  Roger  was  in  custody  during  his  infancy  (sec  No.  497),  and 
most  probfibly  Geoffiy  was  his  guardian,  as  he  was  Roger's  lord,  in  respect  of  this 
land.  If  so,  his  offence  was  aggravated,  and  the  fact  of  his  position  might  account  for 
the  difTerence  in  the  amount  of  the  fines  in  the  two  cases. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 59 

custody,  and  let  Roger's  charter  which  Geoffry  had  of  the  said 
land  be  cancelled  (dampnetr).  Afterwards  Geoffry  comes  and 
makes  a  fine  of  15  marks  by  his  pledges,  Roger  son  of  Simon, 
David  de  Pentyn,  Philip  de  Lukkumb',  Adam  de  Wetheford, 
and  John  de  Luckumb*. 

497.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Jollan', 
father  of  Roger,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  of  one 
ferling  and  a  half  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Thornor 
on  the  day  on  which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  Roges 
de  Porlok  holds,  who  comes  and  says  that  he  ought  not  to 
answer  him  [Roger]  on  this  writ,  because  he  himself  [Roger]  was 
in  seisin  of  the  said  land  after  the  death  of  William  his  father, 
so  that  he,  Roger,  sold  the  land  to  him,  Roges,  by  his  charter, 
which  [the  latter]  proffers,  and  which  testifies  this.  And  Roger 
comes  and  says  that  the  charter  ought  not  to  hurt  him  because 
at  the  time  when  it  was  made  he  was  under  age  and  in  wardship, 
and  therein  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize,  and  Roger  likewise. 
The  jury  say  that  in  truth  the  aforesaid  Roger  Jollayn  was  in 
seisin  of  the  aforesaid  land  after  the  death  of  his  father,  but  they 
say  that  he  was  under  age  at  the  time  when  the  charter  was 
made,  because  it  was  made  before  the  crossing  of  our  lord  the 
Earl  Richard  into  Brittany,  so  that  at  the  most  he  was  not 
more  than  fifteen  years  of  age.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Roger  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Roges  is  in  mercy.  He 
made  a  fine  of  i  mark  by  pledges  of  Geoffry  de  Dunheved  and 
John  de  Locumb*. 

498.  John  Love  gives  20s.  for  a  licence  to  agree*  with  Ralph 
de  Kingebir'  on  a  plea  of  land  by  pledge  of  Ralph  de  Muntsorel 
and  the  aforesaid  Ralph. 

499.  Stephen  de  Mandevill'  seeks  against  Geoffry  de  Maun- 
deviir  two  virgates  of  land  and  three  acres  of  meadow  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Kynton'*  as  his  right,  etc.,  and  in  which  the 
same  Geoffry  has  no  entry  unless  by  Robert  de  Mandevill',  to 
whom  William  de  Mandevill',  father  of  the  aforesaid  Stephen, 
whose  heir  [he  is],  etc.,  demised  them  for  a  term,  which  has 
expired,  and  he  produces  suit,  etc.  And  Geoffry  comes  and 
defends  his  right  and  such  entry,  and  says  that  the  aforesaid 
William  de  MaundevilT  released  and  quitclaimed  for  himself 
and  his  heirs  Kynton'  with  all  its  appurtenances  which  Robert 
de    Mandeviir   his   nephew   had    commended   to   him   for  the 

^  Sec  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  119,  No.  76.  '  Keipton  Mandeville. 


l6o  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

support  of  his  life,  and  all  the  right  and  claim  which  he  had 
or  might  have  in  the  same  vill  with  all  its  appurtenances  for 
himself  and  his  heirs  to  the  aforesaid  Robert  de  Maundevill' 
and  his  heirs  without  any  reservation,  and  proffers  a  charter 
of  the  said  William  de  Maundevill',  which  testifies  this.  After- 
wards a  concord  was  made  by  licence,  and  they  have  the  chiro- 
graph.    And  Geoffry  gives  i  mark  for  the  licence  to  agree.* 

500.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de  Gant 
unjustly,  etc.,  obstructed  a  certain  way  in  Polet  to  the  injury  of 
the  free  tenement  of  John  Cote  in  Stnethold',  since  the  first 
crossing,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  the  aforesaid 
Henry  has  raised  a  certain  dyke  in  the  same  vill  to  the  injury,  etc. 
And  Henry  comes  and  prays  judgment  whether  he  ought  to 
answer  him,  inasmuch  as  his  writ  speaks  of  obstruction  of  a  certain 
way,  and  in  his  statement  [John]  says  that  [Henry]  raised  a  certain 
dyke.  And  because  in  his  pleading  he  varies  from  his  writ,  it  is 
considered  that  Henry  [ma)'  go]  without  a  day,  and  John  Cote 
is  in  mercy  by  his  pledges,  Jordan  de  Bradenye  and  Thomas 
Trevet. 

501.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Alexander  de 
Pleybyr'*  father  of  Emma,  the  wife  of  Roger  de  Pleybir*,  was 
seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  five  acres  of  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  Katikote,'  on  the  day  on  which,  etc.,  and  whether, 
etc.,  which  land  Roger  Whythand  holds,  who  comes  and 
says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because  he  does  not 
hold  the  entirety  of  the  said  five  acres,  for  that  a  certain  William 
de  Hamme  holds  half  an  acre  and  Thomas  de  Bcrton*  holds  half 
an  acre  thereof,  and  upon  that  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 
And  Roger  and  Emma  come  and  say  that  he,  Roger,  holds  the 
entirety  of  the  said  five  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
and  so  held  on  the  day  when  the  writ  was  sought,  and  upon 
that  they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that 
the  aforesaid  Roger  Whythand  holds  the  entirety  of  the  said 
five  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  sought  against  him. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Roger  and  Emma  should  recover 
their  seisin  in  the  aforesaid  five  acres,  with  the  appurtenances,  by 
view  of  the  jury.     And  Roger  Wytang'  is  in  mercy  by  his  pledge.* 

^  The  fine  was  levied   in   the   quinzaine  of  Hilary  :    **  Stephen  quitclaimed   to 
Geoffry,  and  for  this  Geoffry  gave  him  i  mark."     "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  122,  No.  89. 

*  For  Pleybury,  see  Bruton  Chartulary. 

*  Catcott  in  Moorlinch. 

*  There  is  a  marginal  note  **  mid"  run  through,  and  below  **c^,"  i.e.,  custodiatur. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  l6l 

502.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  de  Lange- 
brug'  unjustly,  etc.,  raised  a  certain  dyke  in  Langebrug*  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  the  Prior  of  Bath  in  Walekote, 
since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And  John  comes  and  confesses 
that  he  raised  the  said  dyke  to  the  injury,  etc.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  the  dyke  should  be  thrown  down  by  view  of  the 
jury,  and  that  it  should  be  as  it  was  wont  and  ought  to  be,  and 
John  is  in  mercy.     Let  him  be  in  custody. 

503.  Walter  Cumyn,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
against  the  Abbot  of  Glaston*  concerning  common  of  pasture  in 
Markbyr',  which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  Hundesterte, 
comes  and  withdraws  himself  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute,  namely,  John  de  Hundisterth  and  Richard  de 
Hundesterth,  are  in  mercy.  Pledges  for  Walter's  amercement : 
Nicholas  Boyvin  of  Kattkote  and  Roger  son  of  Richard  de 
Mere.* 

504.  Agnes  wife  of  Morice  de  Legh*  puts  in  her  place  Morice 
before  the  four  knights  sent  to  her,  etc.,  against  Amice  de  la  Bye 
on  a  plea  of  land,  etc.^ 

505.  Philippa,  formerly  the  wife  of  Philip  de  Wyk',  gives 
I  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with  William  le  Usser  on  a  plea  of 
dower,  by  pledge  of  Robert  de  Chandos.  And  it  is  agreed  that 
the  aforesaid  William  Lussier,  guardian  of  the  land  and  heirs  of 
Philip  la  Wyk*,  should  grant  to  Philippa  the  manor  of  Wyk', 
with  its  appurtenances,  except  a  certain  hamlet  which  is  called 
Aeston*,  to  hold  for  the  whole  life  of  Philippa  in  the  name  of 
dower,^  saving  the  right  of  the  aforesaid  heirs  on  attaining  full 
age,  etc. 

Memb.  4. 

506.  William*  de  Broy,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Katharine  de  Monte  Acuto,  John  de  Gatesden*, 

^  In  the  margin  here  is  written  "bo."  I  take  it  to  be  a  contraction  for  bona^  and 
may  signify  that  on  enquiry  it  has  been  found  that  the  pledges  have  goods  sufficient 
to  answer  their  liability.     I  have  not  met  with  such  note  elsewhere. 

*  This  would  appear  to  be  a  case  of  vill-sickness.  If  so,  Agnes  was  prevented  by 
sickness  from  continuing  her  attendance  in  court  after  the  first  day.  On  the  fourth 
day  four  knights  would  have  been  sent  to  her  by  the  court  to  obtain  her  appointment 
of  an  attorney  for  her  to  gain  or  to  lose.  The  knights  certify  that  she  appoints  her 
husband.     See  Bract.,  f.  363b.     See  also  Nos.  528  and  529. 

'  Assignment  of  dower  was  not  postponed  by  reason  of  the  infancy  of  the  heir 
(Glanv.,  ^x>k  vj.,  c.  17). 

*  Over  this  name  is  written  "  nichiij" 

y 


1 62  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

^^-^— ^—■~™^— ^-^^^-^^^— ^^^-"^^^^— » 

and  Roger  de  la  Stile  concerning  a  tenement  in  Oysebergh', 
does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely,  Robert  Launclev6e  and  Richard  de  Hillecumb*,  are  in 
mercy. 

507.  William  de  Bykeslegh'  seeks  against  Moses  {Mays)  le 
Bret  six  messuages,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Holewell,  as  his 
right  and  inheritance,  etc.,  and  whereof  one  William  his  ancestor 
was  seised  as  of  fee  and  by  right  in  the  time  of  King  John, 
taking  therefrom  profits  to  the  value  of  J  mark.  And  from  him, 
William,  the  right  in  that  land  descended  to  one  Huardus  as  son 
and  heir,  and  from  him  Huardus  to  him,  William,  who  now  claims 
as  son  and  heir,  and  that  such  is  his  right  he  offers,  etc.  And 
Moses  comes  and  defends  his  right  when  and  where,  etc,  and 
says  that  he  ought  not  to  answer  him  on  this  writ  because  the 
same  William  has  elsewhere  impleaded  him  concerning  three 
acres  of  land  and  three  cottages  in  the  same  vill  in  the  court  of 
our  lord  the  King  that  now  is,  so  that  a  chirograph  was  made 
between  them  in  the  same  court,*  and  he  proffers  the  chirograph, 
which  testifies  that  the  aforesaid  William  admitted  the  aforesaid 
land  and  cottages,  with  the  appurtenances,  to  be  the  right  of 
him,  Moses,  to  have  and  to  hold  the  same  to  Moses  and  his 
heirs,  of  the  aforesaid  William  and  his  heirs,  in  like  manner  with 
all  other  lands  and  tenements  which  the  same  Moses  held  of  the 
aforesaid  William  in  the  same  vill  on  the  day  on  which  the 
licence  to  agree  was  granted  by  the  services  in  the  same  chiro- 
graph contained.  And  William  de  Bykeslegh'  comes  and  says 
that  that  chirograph  ought  not  to  hurt  him,  because  the  six 
messuages  which  he  seeks  are  not  [part]  of  the  aforesaid  three 
acres  and  three  cottages  in  the  chirog^raph  contained,  and  that 
the  same  Moses  does  not  hold  those  six  messuages,  which 
William  seeks  against  him,  of  William  himself,  and  he  offers 
our  lord  the  King  ^  mark  that  it  may  be  inquired  whether 
the  aforesaid  Moses,  on  the  day  on  which  the  aforesaid  chiro- 
graph was  made  between  them,  held  the  said  six  messuages 
of  the  aforesaid  William  or  not,  and  it  is  received.  And 
William  [Moses]  likewise  puts  himself  upon  that  inquest. 
Therefore   let  a  jury  be  had   thereon.*     Afterwards   William 

*  At  Westminster  in  three  weeks  of  Easter,  26  Hen.  III.  See  "  Somerset  Fines," 
p.  109,  No.  40. 

^  Upon  this  the  sheriff  would  be  ordered  to  summon  a  jury  of  twelve  before  the 
coroners  and  himself,  to  make  the  inquiry. 


SOMERSETSHraE  PLEAS.  163 

comes  and  confesses  that  the  aforesaid  Moses  held  [of  William] 
on  the  day  on  which  the  chirograph  was  made,  the  said  six 
messuages  which  he  seeks  against  him.  Therefore  it  is  con- 
sidered that  Moses  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  William  is 
in  mercy.  He  made  a  fine  of  405.  by  pledge  of  Richard  de 
Langeford. 

508.  Ranulf  Flury,  who  brought  a  writ  of  novel  disseisin 
against  William  the  Usher  (Aasiiarius')  and  others  concerning 
a  tenement  in  Nygchide,'  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and 
his  pSedges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Walter  dc  Knippclcgh  and 
Stephen^  de  Welington,  are  in  mercy.  And  Simon  de  Wcbbe- 
ford',  one  of  the  recognitors,  does  not  come.  Tljerefore  he  is  in 
mercy, 

509.  Robert  de  Marisco  seeks  against  Walter  I'age  five 
ferlings  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Babinton',  as  his 
right,  etc.,  and  whereof  Robert  was  seised  as  of  fee  and  of 
right  in  the  time  of  our  lord  the  King  that  now  is,  taking  there- 
from profits  to  the  value  of  lOs.,  etc.  And  Walter  comes  and 
vouches  to  warranty  the  Master  of  the  Knights  Templars  in 
England.  Let  him  have  him  on  the  octave  of  the  Purification 
of  5ie  Blessed  Mary  by  aid  of  the  court.  And  Robert  puts  in 
his  place  Jordan  de  Marisco.' 

510.  William  de  Dunnemere  seeks  against  GeofTry  de  Mora 
two  virgates  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Bissopeston" ;" 
and  against  Robert  the  Chaplain  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill ;  and  against  Luke  de  Tytenhull' 
half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill, 
as  his  right,  etc.,  and  whereof  one  Henry  his  ancestor  was 
seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  and  of  right  in  the  time  of  King 
Henry,  grandfather  of  our  lord  the  King  that  now  is,  taking 
therefrom  profits  to  the  value  of  ^  mark,  etc.,  and  from  him, 
Henry,  the  right  in  that  land  descended  to  one  Ralph  as  son 
and  heir,  and  from  him,  Ralph,  to  one  William  as  brother  and 
heir,  and  from  him,  William,  to  William  himself,  who  now  seeks 
as  son  and  heir,  etc.     And  that  such  is  his  right  he  offers,  etc. 

'  There  ore  various  n 
(we  Ducange,  Ginss.),  Ii 

*  Njrneheail  Floriy. 
'  Over  thit  imme  »  written  "  a/i'ii." 
'  This  suil  acems  lo  h»vc  ended  in  a  fine  levied  ul 

of  Buler.     See  "  Somerset  Finn,"  p.  III. 

*  Biuhopslon  in  Montacute. 


1 64  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

And  Geoffry  and  the  others  come,  and  Luke  vouches  to  warranty 
the  aforesaid  Geoffry,  who  is  present,  and  he  warrants  him.  And 
Geoffry  and  Robert  defend  his  [William's]  right  and  the  seisin  of 
the  aforesaid  Henry  his  ancestor,  and  put  Aemselves  upon  the 
Grand  Assize  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  pray  that  a  recognition 
may  be  made  whether  they  have  a  greater  right  in  the  said  land 
than  the  aforesaid  William.  And  Geoffry  offers  our  lord  the 
King  i  mark  to  have  by  the  mention  of  year  and  day,  etc.,' 
and  it  is  received,  by  pledge  of  Luke  de  Tyntenhull.  And 
William  Maubaunc,  sworn,  Benedict  de  Bere,  sworn,  William 
de  Aston,  sworn,  and  Thomas  de  Cruket,  sworn — four  knights 
summoned  to  choose  twelve  to  make  the  assize,  come  and  elect 
them,  to  wit,  Pharamond  de  Bolonia,  Eustace  de  Doueliz,  Alan 
de  Furneus,  Robert  de  Stantun',  Adam  de  Wodeton',  Adam 
Gyanne,  William  de  Bikelegh*,  Robert  de  Bosco,  Ralph  de 
Meriet,  Ralph  son  of  Bernard*,  William  Malet,  Greoffry  de 
Wermeweir,  John  de  Bonevill*,  Richard  de  Langeford',  Lan- 
valus  Pancevot,  and  William  de  Paris.  Afterwards  they  are 
agreed,  and  William  gives  405*.  for  a  licence  to  agree*  by  pledge 
of  Herbert  de  Kausne  and  Robert  I^ncelev6e. 

511.  And  be  it  known  that  the  aforesaid  William^  sought 
against  William  de  Hewenb'g  and  his  wife  one  virgate  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill.  And  she  essoined 
herself  de  malo  lectin  and  she  is  ill.  Therefore  he  is  told  that  he 
should  look  for  his  day  against  her  at  the  Tower  of  London. 

512.  Martin  de  Legh  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree* 
with  Ralph  Hose  and  Eva  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  land,  and  let 
them  have  the  chirc^raph.     By  pledge  of  Robert  de  Blakeford. 

513.  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree*  with  Cecily  daughter  of  Ralph  de  Sancta  Barba  on  a  plea 


true  issue  of /ixr/  which  the  assize  must  Brst  find.  Thus,  in  the  case  before  us,  upon 
the  acceptance  of  Geoffry's  J  mark  the  assize  would  be  directed  first  to  find  whether 
William  s  ancestor  was  in  fact  seised  in  the  time  of  King  Henry  the  grand&ther. 
If  the  assize  should  find  this  not  to  be  true,  they  would  go  no  further.  If,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  seisin  should  be  established,  the  assize  would  proceed  to  deal  with 
the  question  of  right.     See  as  to  this  practice,  Co.  Litt.,  295a.     See  No.  587. 

^  See  "  Somerset  Fines,"  pp.  114-5. 

•'  See  "Somerset  Fines,"  pp.  1 14-5,  where  the  extract  appears  to  refer  to  this 
suit. 

*  See  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  119,  No.  77. 

^  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  120,  No.  81. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 65 


of  land.  By  pledges  of  Herold  de  Glaston'  and  Thomas  de 
Marisco. 

5 14.  Margaret,  who  was  the  wife  of  Roger  fitz  Payne,  puts  in 
her  place  Thomas  son  of  Thery  against  Adam  the  cook  (cocus) 
on  a  plea  of  land  and  on  a  plea  of  mort  d'ancestor,  etc. 

515.  Emma  wife  of  Hugh  Sanzaver  puts  in  her  place * 

Hugh  Sanzauver,  and  Emma  his  wife  put  in  their  place 
Nicholas  le  Poher  against  Ralph  le  Sauvage*  on  a  plea  of 
warranty  of  charter,  etc.,  and  against  Robert  le  Beu  and  others 
in  the  writ  named  on  a  plea  of  naifty,  etc.  A  day  is  given  them 
on  Wednesday  next  after  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary. 

516.  Joel  de  Valletorto,  the  sheriflF,  is  in  mercy  because  he 
has  no  writ  at  hand  nor  in  any  way  sufficiently  answers,  and  he 
is  amerced  in  20  marks.^ 

517.  The  Abbot  of  Keynessum  puts  in  his  place  Robert  de 
Chaundoyes  against  Walter  the  Chaplain  of  Staunton,  on  a  plea 
of  mort  d'ancestor,  etc. 

Memb,  4^. 

518.  Osbert  de  Norhtover,  who  brought  a  writ  of  mort 
d*ancestor  against  Matilda  daughter  of  Thomas  and  others 
concerning  twenty-one  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Chiw,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely,  Henry  Lunesheft  and  Vitor  de  la  Hale,  are 
in  mercy. 

519.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  Kyte 
father  of  William  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  one 
messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Tampton'  on  the  day  on 
which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  messuage  Christiana,  for- 
merly the  wife  of  Richard  Kyte,  holds,  who  comes  and  says 
that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made  because  she  does  not  hold 
that  messuage,  but  that  a  certain  Nicholas  son  of  Richard,  and 
John  and  Geoffry  brothers  of  Nicholas,  hold  it.  The  jurors  say 
that  in  truth  Christiana  does  not  hold  that  messuage,  but  that 
the  aforesaid  Nicholas  and  his  brothers  [hold  it].  Therefore 
it  is  considered  that  Christiana   [may  go]  without  a  day,  and 

*  At  this  place  the  entry  ends,  and  what  follows  is  written  as  a  fresh  entry. 

^  Apparently  he  is  the  same  person  as  Ralph  de  Cherleton,  named  in  the  fine 
abstracted  in  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  121,  No.  84.     See  No.  614. 

'  The  sheriff  had  not  prepared  himself  properly  for  the  coming  of  the  justices 
and  was  careless,  and  so  he  was  heavily  finea. 


1 66  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


William  is  in  mercy.     He   made  fine  for   loi.  l^  pledge   of 
Richard  de  Treyberge  and  Robert  de  Angers. 

520.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Jordan  de 
Alkeseye  unjustly,  etc,  raised  two  dykes  in  Polet*  to  the  injury 
of  the  free  tenement  of  Henry  de  Gant  in  the  same  vill,  since 
the  first  crossing,  etc  And  Jordan  comes  and  alleges  nothing 
wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  And  William  Long 
{Longus)y  one  of  the  jurors,  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  is  in 
mercy.  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Jordan  raised  two 
dykes  to  the  injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  the  said  Henry,  as 
the  writ  says,  so  that  where  the  said  Henry  was  accustomed  to 
pass  with  carts  and  teams  (cum  carrettis  et  bigis)  he  is  hindered 
by  the  dykes,  by  which  he  is  less  able  to  use  the  said  way. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  dykes  should  be  thrown 
down  by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  that  tiie  way  should  be  as  it 
ought  and  was  wont  to  be.  And  Jordan  is  in  mercy  by  pledge 
of  Walter  de  Kote  and  Martin  Cole.     Damages,  2J. 

521.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Harald  de 
Glaston'  and  Walter  le  Franc  unjustly,  etc,  disseised  Jordan 
de  Marisco  of  his  free  tenement  in  Cusinton',*  since  the 
first,  etc,  and  concerning  which  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  a  yearly  render  of  half  a  pound  of  cumin  which 
a  certain  Matilda  de  Hause  was  accustomed  {solebat)  to  render 
to  him.  Afterwards  Jordan  comes  and  withdraws  himself,  as 
appears  elsewhere  in  the  roll.' 

522.  Sabina  daughter  of  Geoflfry,  who  brought  a  writ  of  entry 
against  Christiana,  who  was  the  wife  of  Walter  de  Sancto  Georgio, 
and  Richard  and  Geoflfry  sons  of  Christiana,  concerning  three 
messuages,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Axebruge,  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledge  to  prosecute,  namely, 
Stephen  de  Bledon',  are  in  mercy,  but  her  other  pledge  has  died. 

523.  Jordan  de  Marisco,  who  brought  a  writ  of  entry  against 
Jordan  son  of  Jordan  Ridell*  touching  a  rent  of  5^.  6d,  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Cusinton,  comes.  And  Jordan  son  of  Jordan 
does  not  come,  and  it  is  testified  that  he  does  not  hold  the  afore- 
said rent,  because  he  lost  {amisit)  it  previously  upon  an  assize  of 
mort  d'ancestor.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Jordan  de 
Marisco  should  take  nothing  by  that  writ,  and  that  he  should  be 
amerced  for  his  false  claim.     Let  him  be  in  custody. 

*  Pawlet.  *  CossingtoD.  »  See  No.  623. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 67 

524.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Alexander  de 
Alscumb'  father  of  Alice,  wife  of  Warresius  son  of  Reginald, 
was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  eight  acres  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Cruk',  on  the  day,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which 
land  Walter  de  Ely  holds  ;  who  comes  and  says  that  no  assize 
ought  to  be  made  therein,  because  he  holds  no  land  in  Cruk', 
and  the  others  confess  this.  Therefore  Walter  may  go  without 
a  day,  and  Warresius  and  Alice  are  in  mercy.  [The  amerce- 
ment] is  pardoned  because  they  are  paupers.^ 

525.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Lecia  daughter 
of  Walter,  and  mother  of  Roesia  wife  of  William  de  Ardis,  was 
seised  in  her  demesne,  etc.,  of  one  messuage  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  Radeklive,*  on  the  day  on  which,  etc.,  and  whether, 
etc.,  which  messuage  Henry  Hallehors  and  Isabella  his  wife 
hold,  who  come.  And  upon  this  come  the  bailiffs  of  Bristoir, 
[who  say  that]  that  tenement  is  in  the  liberty  of  Bristoll', 
where  such  a  writ  does  not  run.^  And  they  proffer  a 
charter  of  King  Henry,  grandfather,  etc.,  which  testifies  this. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Henry  and  Isabella  [may  go] 
without  a  day,  and  William  de  Ardis  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be 
in  custody.* 

526.  William  de  Ardis  and  Roesia  his  wife  seek  against 
Henry  Hallehors  one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Radeclive,  as  the  right  of  Roesia,  in  which  Henry  has  no  entry 
unless  by  Isabella,  formerly  the  wife  of  Eborard  son  of  Thomas, 
who  held  it  in  dower  of  the  gift  of  Eborard,  formerly  her  husband, 
brother  of  Roesia,  whose  heir  she  is  as  they  say.  And  Henry 
comes  and  fully  confesses  that  he  has  entry  through  Isabella  his 
wife,  as  the  writ  says.  And  because  William  and  Roesia  admit 
this,  it  is  considered  that  Henry  should  hold  the  said  messuage 
with  its  appurtenances  for  the  whole  life  of  Isabella  his  wife,  and 
William  is  in  mercy  for  false  claim.*  William's  pledges  for  the 
amercement :  Robert  Arthur  of  Bysburthi  and  Robert  Alein  of 
Bermenistr'. 

527.  William^  son  of  Nicholas,  who  brought  a  writ  of  mort 
d'ancestor  against  William  de  Windlesor'  concerning  half  the 

*  In  the  margin.  '  Redcliff,  Bristol. 

^  See  note  to  No.  422,  an/^,  with  respect  to  Wells,  and  the  Grand  Assize. 
^  In  the  margin. 

*  In  the  margin  is  **c^,"  let  him  be  in  custody. 

*  Over  this  name  is  written  **nuhtL"    See  note  to  No.  508.     **  Usher  **  may  of 
may  not  be  right  in  this  context,  but  it  seems  probably  correct 


i6g 


maxxK of  BikcnIiaL' docs  net  proceed.  Thaefate  he;  William^  and 
his  pledges^  namdy^Lanrroceof  the  F,xrht€faeT\deS€mxsuM)smd 
Robert  the  usher  ikost^rius  ^  are  in  mercy. 

;2S.  Robert  dc  Scaimtoa\  Adam  de  Wodetoo'.  Gcofty  de 
WarmvoII*.  and  Alan  de  Funmeys^  fiocr  knigfats  sent  to  Simoo  de 
Pillesckxi,'  vho  ts  OL  etc*  to  hear.*  etc  say  that  he  has  attorned 
in  his  pCace  GcoSry  de  WelLs  against  John  the  parson  of  Cmk* 
on  a  puea  of  land,  against  Adam  Gotddire  on  a  plea  of  land,  and 
against  Helevisa  de  Maondcvill'  on  a  pka  of  dover^  etc 

529L  I>K)nysia  de  B>-defoffd  pats  in  her  pAce  Ralph  de 
G&seli  against  Ralph  de  Giselade  on  a  plea  of  land  before  four 
knfgfets.  etc 

zyx  Mabel  daogfater  of  Adam  Balle  seeks  against  Henr>' 
de  Conteviir  one  messuage  with  the  appmtenances;>  in  Welles; 
as  her  right  and  marriage  portion,  etc  b^'  writ  of  entry.  And 
Henr\'  comes  and  voaches  to  warranty  Radph  Magod.  Let  him 
ha^:e  him  00  the  coming  of  the  justices  into  the  coonty  of 
Dorset  b>-  aid  of  the  court.  And  let  him  be  smnmoned  in  the 
crjcTity  of  Southampton. 

551.  Richard  !e  Bigod  gives  i  mark  for  Hccnoe  to  agree  with 
the  Abbot  of  Cimecestr"  concemir^  common  of  pasture  in 
Jfarston  hy  pledge  of  the  Abbot  and  Thomas  Treves  etc 

532.  The  Abbot  of  Ford  gives  20f.  for  a  licence  to  agree 
xith  Peter  ce  Hooca  and  Joan  his  wife  on  a  p^  of  warrant^' 
of  charter,  etc* 

22>  Richard  de  Mucegros  seeks  against  Nicholas  Michel 
occ  virgate  of  land,  except  three  acres,  with  the  appurtenances 
in  La  Hoie.  and  against  Roger  le  Porter  and  Matilda  his  wife 
two  acres  of  meadow  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill, 
as  his  right,  etc  and  whereof  one  Margery  his  mother  was 
seised  as  of  fee  and  of  right  in  the  time  of  King  John,  taking 
thence  prctits  to  the  v^\x  of  ^  mark,  etc  And  from  her, 
Mar^erv*.  the  right  in  the  land  descended  to  him,  Richard,  as 


in  ii-ort.  'mr  iait  zitesL  prrrssue-i  :t  >a:kne*s  fr.-nr  c;c:jiaiisg  :besr  xrrcrcuDce,  one 
• :  ':«i  icGKuziie!!  wiri  an  «s*:c  at  nxSj  ^.tx\.     Soe  rcce  ^:  X?.  504. 

•  -«c  "-  ^ztaeTjet  F:=c'  r«  i:  jw  No.  75.     TSe  fw  mats  bervvcc  -A.itm.  AbHx 
-f  Iirt,  "Ti^TKic-  iad  Peter  i*  K  :cb;  one  f  .isz  his  wiie,  3cpec>asts>  icw  halzx  rii^e 

■J  .ir.ti  Ji  Lrg!Le. ^ 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 69 

Son  and  heir,  and  that  such  is  his  right  he  offers  to  deraign 

^i^inst  them  by  the  body  of  a  certain  free  man  of  his,  by 

name   Robert  de  Pontefracto,  according  to  what  was  seen  b}- 

Sewall  his  father,  etc.*  («/  de  visu  Sewali patris  sui,  etc).     And 

Nicholas  comes   and    defends   his   [Richard's]   right   and    the 

seisin  of  the  said  Margery  his  mother,  when  and  where,  etc. 

^nd  this  he  offers  to  defend  by   the  body   of  his  free   man, 

Thomas  de  Pyrton'  by  name,  who  is  present,  as  the  court  shall 

consider.     Therefore  it  is  considered  that  there  should  be  battle 

l)etween  them,  and  that  Thomas  should  give  gage  to  defend 

{defendendi)  and  Robert  should  give  gage  to  deraign  {disracio- 

nandt).   Pledges  of  Thomas  :  Robert  de  Columbariis  and  Thomas 

Daniel.    Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  Richard  gives  2  J  marks 

for  a  licence  to  agree  by  pledge  of  Richard  de  Wrotham  and 

Nicholas   Michel.     And    Nicholas   Michel  gives   2J   marks  for 

the  same  by  pledge  of  Robert  de  Blakeford  and   Richard  de 

Wrotham.    And  be  it  known  that  the  aforesaid  Nicholas  Michel 

freely  warrants  Roger  le  Porter  and  Matilda  his  wife,  and  they 

are  agreed  as  to  the  whole,  and  let  them  have  the  chirograph.* 

534.  William  le  Deveneys  seeks  against  Lucy  de  Monte 
Acuto  one  vii^ate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  La  Wayc, 
as  his  right,  and  whereof  Gilbert  father  of  him,  William,  was 
seised  as  of  fee  and  of  right  in  the  time  of  King  John,  taking 
profits  to  the  value  of  \  mark,  etc.,  and  from  him,  Gilbert, 
the  right  in  that  land  descended  to  this  William  as  son  and 
heir.  And  that  such  is  his  right  he  offers,  etc.  And  Lucy,  by 
her  attorney,  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  Katharine  de 
Monte  Acuto,  daughter  and  heir  of  John  de  Monte  Acuto. 
Let  her  have  her  on  Sunday  next  after  the  Purification  of  the 
Blessed  Mary  by  aid  of  the  court  The  sheriff  is  notified,  etc. 
On  that  day  Katharine  does  not  come.  Therefore  it  is  con- 
sidered that  of  the  land  of  Katharine  there  should  be  taken  to 
the  value,  etc.  And  a  day,  etc.  And  she  is  summoned  that 
she  should  be  [present]  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into 
the  county  of  Dorset.* 

'  A  champion  was  supposed  to  have  knowledge  of  the  matter,  either  by  his  own 
eyes,  or  from  what  his  father  had  told  him.     Sec  note  to  No.  564. 

»  The  land  was  in  "  Horsinton."    See  **  Somerset  Fines/'^p.  117,  No.  67 

'  In  litigation  about  land  the  tenant,  or  as  we  should  call  him  the  defendant, 

instead  of  defending  himself,  micht  call  in  a  third  {)erson  to  defend  it.     If  the  third 

person  was  bound,  or  admitted  tliat  he  was  bound,  to  warrant  the  defendant,  the  latter 

retired,  and  the  action  proceeded  against  the  warranto       If  the  olaintiff  succeeded,  he 

Z 


I70  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

535.  Andrew  de  Stratton  and  Bertha  his  wife  sought  in  the 
county  [court]*  Robert  de  Percy  as  their  fugitive  villein,  etc,  so 
that  the  said  Robert  came,  and  brought  a  writ  of  our  lord  the 
King  to  prove  that  he  is  a  free  man,  and  that  in  the  meantime 
he  should  be  in  peace.  And  now  he  comes  and  proffers  a 
certain  charter  of  Humphrey  de  Sancto  Vitoro,  brother  of  the 
aforesaid  Bertha,  which  testifies  that  the  same  Humphrey,  on 
the  petition  of  his  mother,  granted  and  quitclaimed  to  Robert  the 
servitude  which  he  had  of  him,  and  that  he,  Robert,  and  all 
begotten  by  him  should  be  free  men  for  all  time  of  him, 
Humphrey,  and  his  heirs  for  ever.  And  Andrew  and  Bertha 
by  him,  Andrew,  put  in  her  place,  etc.,*  come  to  say  that  the 
charter  ought  not  to  hurt  them,  because  the  said  Humphrey 
never  made  that  charter,  nor  was  it  made  with  his  assent  or  by 
his  will.  And  that  thus  it  was  they  put  themselves  upon  the 
country  and  upon  the  witnesses  named  in  the  charter,  and 
Robert  [does]  likewise.  Therefore  let  a  jury  be  had.  After- 
wards they  are  agreed  by  licence,  and  have  the  chirograph.* 

536.  Robert  de  la  Penne  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  Walter  son  of  Matilda  concerning  half  of  one 
burgage  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Welles,  by  pledge  of  the  said 
Walter,  [and  they  have  the  chirograph*]  ;  and  it  is  agreed  that 
the  aforesaid  Walter  should  release  the  whole  for  2  marks, 
which  Robert  gave  him,  etc. 

537.  Herbert  le  Mazun*  and  Iseult  his  wife,  who  brought  an 
assize  of  novel  disseisin  against  William  de  Marleberg^  touching 
a  free  tenement  in  Welles,  do  not  proceed.    Therefore  they 

recoTered  the  land  from  the  defendant,  who  in  his  turn  recovered  an  exchange  in 
value  {excambium  ad  valerUiam)  from  the  warrantor.  (See  "  Hist.  Eng.  lliw," 
Vol.  ii.,  p.  659. )  If  the  warrantor,  being  bound  to  come,  did  not,  what  ought  to  be 
done  to  compel  him  ?  Manifestly,  as  Glanvill  thought  (Bk.  Ill,  ch.  4),  it  would  be 
unjust  to  take  the  tenement  in  dispute  into  the  King's  hand,  because  the  tenant  was 
not  adjudged  to  be  in  default.  Ine  sheriff  was  therefore  ordered  to  take  into  the 
King's  hand  so  much  of  the  warrantor's  land  as  would  be  equivalent  in  value  to  the 
land,  in  respect  of  which  he  was  vouched  to  warranty.  The  writ  to  the  sheriff  was 
the  "  great  cape "  or  the  "  little  cape"  according  to  whether  the  warrantor  had 
made  default  l)efore  or  after  appeal  ance.  The  procedure  was  more  complicated 
where  there  were  successive  warrantors  in  various  conditions  of  de£uilt,  &c  (See 
Bract. ,  fo.  384  et  seq. ) 

^  The  county  court  had  not  jurisdiction  to  trv  a  question  of  disputed  villeinage. 
In  such  case  the  defendant  had  a  writ  to  remove  the  claim  to  the  Kill's  Court.  (See 
the  writ  in  Glan.,  Bk.  V.,  ch.  2.) 

^  See  No.  444.  '  See  note  to  No.  444. 

^  The  words  in  brackets  are  struck  out. 

•  Over  this  name  is  written  "  alibi J*^ 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


171 


and  their  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Roger  Whyteng''  and 
Humphrey  Michel,  are  in  mercy. 

538.  Alice,  who  was  the  wife  of  Reginald  de  Stok',  seeks 
against  John  le  Ostricer  one-lhird  part  of  twenty-two  acres  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Stok',  as  her  dower,  etc.  And 
John  comes,  and  by  licence  gives  up  to  her  the  said  third  part 
upon  condition  that  if  the  said  Reginald,  husband  of  Alice, 
should  be  alive  and  should  return  to  those  parts,  the  aforesaid 
one-third  part  should  revert  to  the  said  John  and  his  heirs,  etc 

539-  Nichola  de  Chamflur,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  the  Master  of  the  Hospital  of  Bokland'  con- 
cerning a  tenement  in  Hewise,  does  not  come,  and  she  with- 
draws herself.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely.  Thomas  de  Periton'  and  Ralph  le  Waleys,  are  in 
mercy.  She  made  a  iine  for  2cw.  for  herself  and  her  pledges  by 
pledge  of  the  aforesaid  Master.' 

540.  John  Pillok',  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of  charter 
against  Henry  son  of  Humphrey  concerning  one  fcriing  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Cheselade,  does  not  proceed.  There- 
fore he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Henry  Blund  and 
Humphrey  Prat,  are  in  mercy,  John's  pledges  for  the  amerce- 
ment ;   Robert  de  Cokere,  John  de  Everlegh, 

541.  Peter.  Prior  of  Wells,  and  Robert.  Vicar  of  St.  Cuthbert 
in  Wells,  put  in  their  place  Thomas  de  Lungeland'  against 
Geofiry  de  Maundevill'  on  a  plea  of  covenant,  etc. 

542.  Alice,  who  was  the  wife  of  John  Brien,  puts  in  her  place 
Ralph  Fardayn  against  Lucy  de  Bohun  on  a  plea  of  dower. 

543.  The  Abbot  of  Clyve  puts  in  his  place  Adam  de  Wethe- 
ford"  against  Baldwin  de  la  Bere  on  a  plea  of  covenant. 

544-  Iseult  de  Bcre  puts  in  her  place  Peter  de  Bere  her 
husband  against  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  on  a  plea  of  land. 

545.  Amabel  de  Bevene  puts  in  her  place  Geoffry  de 
Laverton  against  Thomas  the  chaplain  of  Efferton  and  William 
de  Mamus,  and  others  named  in  the  writ,  on  a  pica  of  land,  etc, 

546.  Matilda  de  Alneto  puts  in  her  place  Roger  Portarius 
against  Richard  de  Mucengros,  and  others  named  in  the  writ,  on 
a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

547.  The  Abbot  of  Neth'  puts  in  his  place  Brother  Ernald 
his  lay  brother  against  William  de  Barry  on  a  plea  of  warranty 
of  charter,  etc. 


1/2  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

548.  William  the  Franklin  of  Nethercote  gives  i  mark  for 
a  licence  to  agree  with  William  Spark  and  Juliana  his  wife 
and  Sabina  sister  of  Juliana  on  a  plea  of  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor  by  pledges  of  Peter  de  Thurkewell*  and  the  said 
William  Spark.* 

Memb.  $d. 

549.  Thcophila  daughter  of  Sampson  seeks  against  Alice 
daughter  of  Robert  de  Stoki*x)de  two  parts  of  one  virgate  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Stokwode,  as  her  right,  etc,  of 
which  one  Hcnr>-  her  brother  was  seised  as  of  fee  and  of  right 
in  the  time  of  our  lord  the  King  that  now  is,  taking  therefirofn 
pn>tits  to  the  \*alue  of  ^  mark,  etc  and  firom  Henr>-  the  r^ht 
in  that  land  descended  to  her,  Theophila,  who  now  claims  as 
sister  and  heir,  and  that  such  is  her  r^^t  she  offers,  etc  And 
Alice  comes  and  says  that  she  ought  not  to  ansn-er  upon  this 
wTit,  because  the  said  Henr\'  had  a  certain  brother  Robert, 
father  of  hen  Alice,  whose  heir,  etc,  who  had  the  greater  r^t 
in  the  said  land  than  Thcophila.  And  Theophila  cannot  deny 
this.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Alice  [may  go]  without 
a  day,  and  Theophila  is  in  merc>\  She  is  a  pauper,  and  has 
nothing. 

55a  Robert  de  Akiewyk,  who  broi^t  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  the  Abbot  of  Glaston*,  and  many  others  named 
in  the  wriC  concerning  common  of  pasture  in  Wrii^cton,  which 
appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  Alde«\i^^  comes  and  with> 
dra^^  himself  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely,  Stephen  de  Stanton  and  Robert  Ab^-n  of  [Aldcmy-k. 
.Om^-c'.-***]  Bcmiiistr*,  are  in  mercy.  Roberts  pSedgcs  for  kts 
amenremcnt :  Robert  de  Brcr*te  and  Adam  de  Aeston\ 

551.  The  assixe  comes  to  recognise  whether  Geomy  Je 
Rcruman^:  uther  of  h^ette.  wife  of  Pa>Tie  de  StawelT.  was 
setsevi  in  hts  demesne,  etc:,  of  a  rent  ot  yS.6J.  with  the  appor* 
tenarxx'Sv  in  Cusintoo',*  on  the  day  on  whidu  etc  And  whed!ier, 
etc^  which  rer.t  Jocuan  Ridei.  texunt,  hoSds  ^Umit\  who  docs  rscC 
cooe.  and  he  was  rc^s^anmooeA  Thaefae  let  the  a:ssc£e 
rrvxxtv.  A^iairrs:  him  b\*  oeftault.  And  Hi^  Tcihwtc,  coe  of 
ih>e  ;urvX^  does  noc  cocae  ;  tbcreiSxe  he  is  in  mcfc>\     The  peers 

H  art.  r*  H«a.  Ill ,  *:  liAesxt- 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  173 

say  that  the  said  Geoffry  le  Flemmang  died  seised  of  the  said 
rent  as  of  fee,  and  that  he  died  within  the  term,^  and  that  the 
said  Ivette  is  his  next  heir.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Payne  and  Ivette  should  receive  their  seisin  of  the  said  rent,  and 
Jordan  is  in  mercy. 

552.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Abbot  of 
Glaston'  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Nicholas  de  Dunheved  of  his 
common  of  pasture  in  Melles,  which  appertains  to  his  free  tene- 
ment in  Mykelstok',  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  And  wherein 
it  is  complained  that  the  Abbot  drew  and  apprppriated  to  him- 
self about  forty-four  acres  of  the  said  pasture  which  was  always 
common  of  him  [Nicholas]  and  his  ancestors  until  the  disseisin 
made  by  the  Abbot,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize.  And  the  Abbot  comes  and  alleges  nothing  against  the 
assize,  beyond  that  he  says  that  the  aforesaid  forty  acres  of 
pasture,  touching  which  Nicholas  complains,  were  always  his 
[the  Abbot's]  severalty,  and  neither  he  [Nicholas]  nor  his 
ancestors  were  ever  accustomed  to  have  common  there,  and, 
moreover,  he  says  that  he  [Nicholas]  could  not  nor  ought  to 
have  any  common  there,  as  appurtenant  to  any  tenement  in 
Mikelstok',  and  thereupon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 
And  William  de  Thomy,  one  of  the  jurors,  does  not  come  ; 
therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 

The  jurors  say  that  in  truth  twenty  years  ago  there  were 
forty  acres  of  pasture,  concerning  which  Nicholas  complains, 
enclosed  within  a  dyke,  and  that  the  Abbot  has  now  newly 
repaired  and  raised  the  dyke  ;  that  the  said  Nicholas  was  wont 
to  common  there,  because  the  said  dyke  was  not  repaired  ;  but 
they  say  positively  that  he  ought  not  to  have  common  there  by 
reason  of  his  tenement,  wherefore  they  say  positively  that  the 
Abbot  did  not  disseise  him  of  the  said  pasture.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  the  Abbot  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Nicholas 
is  in  mercy  by  his  pledges.  And  concerning  the  four  acres,  they 
say  that  a  certain  villein  of  the  Abbot  inclosed  them,  and  that 
he  disseised  Nicholas.  Pledges  of  Nicholas  de  Dunheved  for  his 
amercement :  John  de  Boleviir,  Ernisius  de  Dunheved. 

553.  Maurice  de  Legh'  and  Agnes  his  wife  seek  against 
Peter  de  Gurnay  half  a  hide  of  land  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Dundray,  as  their  right,  etc.,  of  which  one  Henry  father  of 
Agnes  was  seised  as  of  fee  and  of  right  in  the  time  of  King 

^  Of  limitation. 


174  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

John,  taking  therefrom  profits  to  the  value  of  |  mark.  And 
from  Henry  the  right  in  that  land  descended  to  her,  Agnes,  who 
seeks.  And  that  such  is  their  ri^t  he  offers,  etc  And  Peter 
comes  and  defends  their  right  now,  etc,*  and  vouches  to  warranty 
Robert  de  Gumay  by  the  charter  of  Hawise  de  Gumay,  his, 
Robert's,  grandmother,  which  he  proffers,  and  which  witnesses 
that  she  gave  and  granted  to  Maelus  de  Gumay,  her  kinsman 
{consanguineo  suo\  all  her  land  of  Hasel  with  the  appurtenances 
for  his  homage  and  service,  and  which  she  held  of  the  Bishop  of 
Bath  in  fee,  to  hold  of  her  and  her  heirs  quit  of  all  services  saving 
the  royal  service  {salvo  regali  servicio\  which  belongs  to  the  tenth 
part  of  one  knight's  fee,  to  wit,  half  a  hide  of  land.  And  Robert 
comes  and  fiiUy  admits  the  charter  and  what  is  contained 
therein,  and  says  that  he  will  willingly  warrant  the  land  which 
he  holds  in  Hasel,  and  asks  judgment  whether  he  oug^t  to 
warrant  him  in  respect  of  any  tenement  in  Dimdray,  since  the 
aforesaid  charter  does  not  refer  to  any  tenement  in  Dundray. 
And  Peter  comes  and  says  that  he  [Robert]  unjustly  says  that 
he  ought  not  to  warrant  him  of  the  aforesaid  land,  because  he, 
Peter,  did  homage  to  the  said  Robert  for  the  same  land,  and 
holds  it  of  him,  and  he,  Robert,  is  in  seisin  of  the  service  of  him, 
Peter.  And  he  says  that  the  place  called  Hesel  is  member  of 
Dundray.  Afterwards  they  came  to  agreement*  by  licence,  and 
have  the  chirograph.  And  Peter  gives  i  mark  for  the  licence 
to  agree,  by  pledge  of  Adam  de  Aston. 

554.  Concerning  the  county  of  Somerset,  except  the  liber- 
ties, its  fine  before  judgment  of  60  marks,  because  the  county 
has  not  made  suit* 

555.  The  Prior  of  Legh'  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  John  de  Arundell'  on  a  plea  of  advowson  by  pledges 
of  Hugh  Peverel  and  Richard  de  limgeford,'  and  they  have  the 
chirograph.* 

^  \.^y**  nunc  et  alias  uH  ei  qutmdfi  defmtUre  debet  J" 

'  Sec  ••  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  123,  Na  92. 

'  A  county  was  often  amerced  by  the  justices  for  ofiences  or  defiuUts,  and  not 
infrequently,  when  an  adverse  judgment  was  inevitable,  the  county  forestalled  it  and 
made  its  peace  by  ofierii^  a  sum  of  money,  lastances  are  to  be  found  in  Madoz 
Exch.,p.  567.  Seealso"Select  Pleas  of  the  Crown,"  SekL  Soc.No.  38.  Tbesom 
so  offered,  or  "  fine,"  was  collected  from  the  county,  except  such  lib^ties  as  were 
exempt  l^  charter  or  prescription  from  such  burdens.      This  particular  entry  is 

sufficiently  difficult  to  translate  to  justify  its  reproductioD   here: — "C  Comitatu 

SuAset  de  fine  suo  ante  lud  Ix.  A  f^lib  ^  fi  sfi  tooffi." 

*  "  See  aM/r,  Na  395,  and  <*  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  119,  No.  74. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  17S 

556.  Peter  Ruffus  gives  J  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with 
William  Gernun  and  Hawisc  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  land  by 
pledge  of  William  the  cook  {cod)} 

557.  Sybil  wife  of  Robert  de  Baggetripe  puts  in  her  place 
Robert  her  husband  against  Stephen  Mich' [Michel?]  and  Sara 
his  wife  on  a  plea  of  land.  etc. 

558.  Isabella  wife  of  Henry  Halleliors  puts  in  her  place 
him,  Henry  Hallehors,  against  William  de  Ardes  and  Roesia  his 
wife  on  a  plea  of  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor,  etc. 

559.  Matilda  wife  of  Matthew  de  Columbariis  puts  in  her 
place  Adam  de  Bekkcsghate  against  Nicholas  son  of  Roger  and 
Matthew  dc  Clivedon  on  a  plea  by  what  right,  etc. 

560.  Geoffry  de  Maundevill'  puts  in  his  place  Ralph  de 
Basinges  against  Geoffry  de  Brideport  on  a  plea  of  covenant, 
and  against  Richard  parson  of  Hardinton'  on  a  plea  of  cove- 
nant. 

561.  The  Abbot  of  Kaynesham  puts  in  his  place  Robert  dc 
Chandos  against  William  de  Holecumbe  on  a  plea  of  land. 

Metnfi.  6. 

562.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Jonas  the  clerk 
of  Kaynesham,  father  of  Walter,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc. 
of  three  virgates  and  a  fourth  part  of  one  virgate  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Kaynesham,  on  the  day,  etc.,  and  whether 
etc.,  which  land  the  Abbot  of  Kaynesham  holds,  who  comes  by 
his  attorney  and  vouches  to  warranty  Richard  de  Clare,  who  is 
under  age  and  in  custody  of  our  lord  the  King,  by  the  charter* 
of  Earl  William,  the  ancestor  of  Richard,  whose  heir,  etc,  There- 
fore let  [the  matter]  await  his  [full]  age. 

563.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  the  cook, 
father  of  Adam,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  one  messuage 
with  five  acres  of  land  and  one  acre  of  meadow  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Stipekary,'  on  the  day  on  which,  etc,  and  whether,  etc. ; 
which  messuage  and  which  land  and  which  meadow  Margery 
Fitz  Payn  holds,  who  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not 
to  be  made,  because  she  holds  that  land  in  like  manner  with 

'  "  Soinereel  Fines,"  p.  liO,  No.  79. 

'  The  Abbot  allocs  Ihal  bj  reason  of  his  anceslor's  chnitet,  Richard,  the  heir,  ii 
bound  10  wairanl  the  title.     As  I0  Ihe  postponement  of  a  trial  \<y  reason  of  ihe 
niancy  of  a  wanantor,  see  anlt,  note  to  No.  490. 
'  Probably  Caiy  Fitipnyn  in  Chaillon  Makerel. 


1/6  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

Other  lands  which  she  has  with  one  Robert,  son  and  heir  of 
Rc^er  Fitz  Payn,  who  is  in  the  custody  of  our  lord  the  King. 
And  Adam  cannot  contradict  this.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  she  should  not  answer  without  the  leave  of  our  lord  the 
King. 

564.  Robert  de  Bere  and  Avice  his  wife  seek  against  Richard 
son  of  Robert  de  Nitherton'  two  parts  of  half  a  hide,  except  two 
parts  of  two  acres  of  land,and  against  Walter  the  baker  (  WalUrum 
pistoreni)  and  Alice  his  wife  a  third  part  of  half  a  hide,  except  a 
third  part  of  two  acres  of  land,  and  against  Richard  parson  of 
Corston'  two  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Corston', 
as  their  right,  etc,  and  whereof  Avice  was  seised  as  of  fee,  etc, 
in  the  time  of  King  John,  taking  profits  therefirom  to  the  value 
of  \  mark ;  and  tihat  such  is  their  right  he  offers  to  deraign 
against  them  by  the  body  of  Thomas  de  Perreton',  his  free  man, 
as  of  his  sight,  etc'  And  Richard  the  parson,  and  Walter  the 
baker,  and  Alice  his  wife,  come  and  vouch  to  warranty  the 
aforesaid  Richard  son  of  Robert,  who  is  present,  and  warrants 
them  ;  and,  as  well  touching  the  land  which  he  holds  as  touching 
the  land  which  he  warrants,  he  comes  and  defends  their  right 
and  the  seisin  of  the  aforesaid  Avice  and  everything,  and  this 
he  offers  to  defend  against  the  aforesaid  Robert  and  Avice 
by  the  body  of  a  certain  free  man  of  his,  Richard  le  Norreis 
by  name,  as  the  court  shall  consider,  and,  if  any  ill  should 
happen  to  him,  by  some  other  sufficient  man  who  may  be  able 
and  ought  to  do  tiiis  {et  si  de  eo,  etc.,  per  alium,  etc,)}  Therefore 
it  is  considered  that  there  should  be  battle  between  them,  and 
Richard  gives  gage  to  defend  and  Thomas  to  deraign.  Pledges 
of  Richard  :  Robert  de  Bosco  and  Richard  de  Cantilupo.  Pledges 
of  Thomas  :  William  the  cook  of  Liminton*  and  Walter  le  Bretun 
of  Schyreburn*.  And  Robert  and  Avice  put  in  their  place  Richard 
their  son.  A  day  is  given  them  on  Monday  next  after  the 
quindene  of  Easter  at  Westminster,  and  then  let  them  come 
armed.  Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  they  have  the 
chirograph.* 

*  See  anie^  note  to  No.  533.  Quarts  Was  this  Thomas  de  Perreton  the  same  man 
as  the  Thomas  de  Pyrton  of  the  previous  entry,  and,  if  so,  was  he  a  professiona  I 
champion  ? 

*  This  phrase  should  read,  if  written  at  length,  ** et  si  tU  eo  maU  contigtrit  per 
alium  suffkientem  qui  ho€  fauere  possit  et  debeai.'''' 

'•'  This  statement  is  interlined  before  the  prant  of  a  day.  See  "Somerset  Fines," 
p.    Ill,  No.  46.      It  was  levied  in  the  qumzaine  of  Easter  in  the  same  year,  at 


SOMESSETSHIRK   PLEAS. 


177 


565.  William  son  of  Geoffry,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Thomas  son  of  Maurice  touching  a  certain  dyke 
raised  in  Aleveston  to  the  injury  of  his  free  tenement  in  the  same 
vill,  came  and  withdrew  himself.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute,  namely,  Stephen  de  Stanton  and   Geoffry  de   la 

Wyk',  are  in  mercy.     William's  pledf^e  for  his  amercement ' 

He  made  a  fine  for  himself  and  his  pledges  for  i  mark  by  the 
pledges  of  John  .son  of  Robert  de  Slant  and  Thomas  Attewodc 
of  Alnetheston, 

566.  Robert  Walerand  and  Adam  le  Frcre  were  attached  to 
answer  Master  Thomas  de  Asewy  on  a  plea  why  they,  with 
force  and  arms  and  against  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King, 
ejected  (^  vi  t  armis  1  eonv  faeem  dniReg  eUc'unt')  the  aforesaid 
Master  Thomas  of  the  custody  of  the  land  which  was  of  Robert 
de  Barneviir  in  Heynton'  St.  George,  which  custody  he  had  of 
the  gift  of  Gilbert  Marscal!',  formerly  Earl  of  I'embrok',  and 
which  land  the  said  Robert  held  of  the  same  Karl  by  knight 
service,  and  that  by  .such  ejectment  he  is  injured  and  has  suffered 
damage  to  the  value  of  60  marks,  and  he  produces  suit,  etc 
And  Robert  comes  and  defends  the  force,  injury,  peace,  damages 
and  everything,  and  wishes  to  speak  the  truth.  He  says  that  in 
truth  Earl  Gilbert  MariscaU  at  one  time  delivered  the  said  custody 
to  the  aforesaid  Master  Thomas  [to  hold]  at  the  will  of  him,  the 
Earl,  and  that  afterwards  the  same  Earl  ordered  the  said  Master, 
and  the  same  Master  gave  up  the  custody  to  the  aforesaid  Earl. 
And  the  Earl  afterwards  delivered  the  custody  to  the  same 
Robert,  and  sent  his  steward  and  a  servant  to  Robert  to  make 
seisin  to  him  of  the  said  custody,  and  he  vouches  Walter.  Earl 
Mariscair,  brother  and  heir  of  the  aforesaid  Earl,  to  warrant  him. 
Let  him  have  him  in  one  month  after  Easter  at  Westminster,  by 
help  of  the  court. 

567.  Walter  Kyte,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
against  Peter  de  Cuntevill'  and  others  in  the  writ  named  touching 
a  tenement  in  Merk',  came  and  withdrew  himself.  Therefore  he' 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Roger  Wys  of  Merk  and 
Thomas  Bacheler  of  Ivelccstr',  are  in  mercy.      Walter's  pledges 

WcMmiiKler.  Il  U  there  s«i(l  ihit  Ihe  Juel  "  was  wiged  in  umsand  foughl  between 
them  incouil."  It  no  douhl  was  an  imertuplci},  if  nol  a  limulated,  dud,  oT  which 
tbeie  .tre  recorded  instances. 

'  This  part  uf  the  entry  is  unfinisbcd.  The  clerk  was  evidently  waiting  for  (he 
noQie  or  the  pledge,  when  by  mason  of  the  line  made  they  were  no  longer  nccvtsnry. 

•  In  the  margin  is  "  c',"  i.e.,  aislodiaitir. 

2   A 


178  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


for  his  amercement :  Richard  de  Cunteville*  and  William  de 
Marisco.  Afterwards  comes  John  de  Modeslegh',  one  of  the 
principal  disseisors,  and  grants  to  the  same  Walter  Kyte  the 
whole  of  the  land  whereof  he  said  he  was  disseised,  to  wit,  nine 
acres,  with  the  appurtenances,  to  hold  for  the  whole  life  of 
Walter,  and  after  his  death  it  should  revert  to  the  aforesaid  John 
and  his  heirs,  quit,  etc. 

568.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Walter  de  Hcly 
unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Warrcsius  son  of  Reginald  and  Alice  his 
wife  of  their  free  tenement  in  Ascume,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc,, 
and  wherein  it  is  complained  that  he  disseised  them  of  one  acre 
of  land,  on  which  was  situate  a  certain  mill.  And  Walter  comes 
and  says  nothing  whcrcfor  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors 
say  that  the  aforesaid  Werrasius  was  never  seised  of  the  aforesaid 
land.  Wherefore  they  say  positively  that  the  said  Walter  did  not 
disseise  him  {eum)  of  any  free  tenement.  Therefore  Walter  [may 
^o]  without  a  day,  and  Werrasius  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim 
by  pledges  of  Thomas  de  Pillesdon*  and  Peter  de  Whatekumb'. 

569.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  GeofTry  de 
Hrideport,  Walter  his  brother,  John  the  smith  {Jo/uinnes  Faber)^ 
Richard  the  carpenter  {Ricardus  Carpentarius\  Henry  Faiher, 
Henry  Hunte,  Simon  Ferar',  William  Kaherdigan,  GeofTry 
Diure,  William  Diure,  Richard  the  serjeant,  Thomas  de  Lange- 
land*,  Adam  son  of  Martin,  Richard  de  Stincton,  Richard  Bone- 
gent,  Robert  son  of  Emma,  GeofTry  son  of  Emma,  Henry  de 
Stratton,  John  Deveneys,  Wyot  the  baker  (pistor\  Richard 
the  vintner  ( Vinetarius),  William  the  clerk,  William  Ukedy, 
Robert  Franceis,  Robert  Capie,  Roger  le  Macecrer,  Jordan 
Scissor,  Richard  the  baker,  GeofTry  Wolf,  and  Robert  the 
ploughdriver  {Ttnctory  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Robert  de 
Columbariis  of  his  free  tenement  in  Lamieton,  since  the  first 
crossing,  etc.,  and  wherein  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised 
him  of  one  moiety  of  the  manor  of  Lamyetun'  with  the 
appurtenances.  And  no  disseisor  comes  except  GeofTry  de 
Brideport,  who  comes  and  says   nothing   wherefor   the   assize 

*  This  word  is  translated  by  Mr.  Smirke  in  the  Glossary  attached  to  his  paper  on 
the  "  Custumal  of  Bleadon,"  (Proc.  Arch.  Institute,  1849),  as  **  the  plougn-ariver, 
who  tings^  i.e.,  goads  the  oxen."  He  points  out  that  in  a  roll  cited  by  Cullum, 
**  Hist,  of  Hawsted,"  he  is  called  tentor,  **  The  word  *  ting*  is  locally  known  in  the 
provinces."  That  Mr.  Smirke  was  right  in  his  rendering  of  the  word  appears  plainly 
in  several  places  in  the  **  Kentalia  et  Custumaria  of  Glastonbury  "  (Som.  Rec.  Soc.), 
especially  at  p.  220. 


SOMERSETSHtRE  PLEAS, 


(79 


should  remain.  The  jurors  say  that  in  truth  the  aforesaid  Robert 
dc  Columbariis  demised  the  whole  of  his  manor  of  Lamyeton' 
to  the  aforesaid  Geoffry  and  one  Walter  the  chamberlain 
( Waliero  Camerario)  to  farm,  so  that  each  of  them  should  have 
an  equal  part ;  and  the  aforesaid  Waiter  died,  so  that  after  the 
death  of  Walter  the  aforesaid  Robert  came  and  put  himself  in 
seisin  of  the  aforesaid  manor  until  he  should  know  who  ought  to 
have  the  part  of  the  defunct,  and  he  offered  the  aforesaid  GcofTry 
his  part,  to  wit,  a  moiety  of  the  aforesaid  manor,  to  hold  until 
the  end  of  [his]  term,  and  Geoffry  would  not.  but  came  with  all  the 
aforesaid  [disseisors],  and  many  others,  with  horses,  and  arms,  and 
edged  weapons,  to  wit, coats  of  leather,  hauberks, and  other  things 
{artiiis  molutis  sciC  loricis  e(  haub^uys,  el  uliisY  and  ejected  him 
from  the  whole  of  the  aforesaid  moiety  of  the  manor.  Wherefore 
they  say  positively  that  ihcy  disseised  him,  as  the  writ  says. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Robert  should  recover  his  seisin 
in  the  aforesaid  manor,  and  Geoffry  and  the  others  are  in  mercy. 
And  let  them  be  committed  to  gaol.  The  sheriff  must  answer 
for  all.  A  ftenvards  Geoffry  de  Rrideport  comes  and  raakesafinc 
for  the  disseisin  and  other  transgressions  of  /'  lOO  by  the  pledges 
of  Robert  dc  Gurnay,  William  Branch".  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba, 
Ralph  de  Suleny,  Henry  de  Carevill',  Robert  de  Bagdripp', 
Kustace  de  Banlon',  Robert  de  CunteviH',  William  dc  Luveny, 
Thomas  Trivet,  William  Buche,  Ralph  .  .  .  theyn,  William  de 
Radene,  Ralph  de  Ferers,  William  Mare.scall'  of  la  Lade, 
John  Gervas',  Walter  Gervas".  .  .  .  It  is  covenanted  between 
them.  Geoffrj'  and  Robert,  that  the  aforesaid  Geoffry  should 
release  to  the  same  Robert  all  the  right  and  claim  which  he  had 
in  the  .  .  .  manor  of  Lamicton  for  38  marks,  given  to  him 
to  be  paid  one  half  at  Easter  in  the  27th  year  and  ...  at 
the  feast  of  Michaelmas  next  following  the  other  half,  and  lest 
he  should  [fail]  to  do  this,  he  granted,  etc'  And  be  it  known  that 
the  same  Geoffry  will  acquit  him  of  all  debts  and  disputes  which 
they  seek  to  raise  against  him,  whether  by  executors  or  others 


'  "  Armis  meiulii"  I  lilic  lu  mean  wnpons  uf  edge  uid  point,  ns  dislmguishtd 
hota  dnln,  sticks,  ot  stones  (see  BtbcI.,  To.  137).  Loriia  may  mean  a  leatfact  cml 
in  this  contcil.  It  oDcd  is  used  lo  signily  a  coat  of  mail,  a  hauberk,  which  latter  is 
ilescribed  in  Ducanae  Glou.  {vide  "  Halsbetga'')  as  "  ierka  maiulis  iontt.Tti>." 
The  word  "  mBlulii  would  appear  lo  apply  10  "  the  other  things "  in  the  pasage 
under  consideration.     Sec  luTlhei,  No.  looi. 

'  Ko  iloubl  a  power  of  dUlreu  over  his  lands,  elc. 


iSo  SOMERSETSHIRE 


<  fkT  cxiiLMt^ris  nf/  d/jbv>  toncfaxng  tbc  afbfcsaid  manor  op  to  this 
dav. 

57a  Agnes  de  Mulcrs  pots  in  her  place  Walter  CNnner 
against  Ralph  de  Moatesorel  on  a  ptea  of  assiue  of  OGPcd 
disseisin,  cte 

571.  Roe5amiind  de  Mefeslegh*  puis  in  her  place  Nicholas  de 
CunteviT  against  Henr>'  MalfaTcrjIie  00  a  ptea  of  oocd  dgsyfgn. 

^7^:  I\x^  de  Heb-nton'.  Adam  dc  BkdenaT.  William  ie  Hcrt. 
Hu^:^  Rode.  Walter  Spcaketng.  Rkhard  Young  \  jmztMisy, 
William  de  Buneveve.  \<:im  Papfe.  Richard  FranjQeia\Ti'.  Walter 
le  Here  William  Brito.  foca  jc  Hcrtnr.  Hciwde  RnpeC  Rkhani 
le  Heit.  WXLam  de  \V>"qc.  R5chani  Roey.  Edgar  de  Jerdei, 
WHliam  King,  William  K  jrxi\  Adam  Thame.  Ito  Wody.  Willsaxn 
de  Fonte.  Richard  see  oc  Rah)C.  Richard  Se  Mazss^  Adam  the 
reeve.  WHIsam  Spiring,  Ellyas  de  ta  Worth".  Margery  de  la 
Wortbe.  William  de  Aq-.:a.  Acam  de  Mooastcriex  Herbert  de 
Weky.  Waller  le  Buk,  Rcger  5e  Fevcfc.  Robert  CnstDk".  Henry 
Stakel£x&^\  Geocry  de  Bt^reccte.  Walter  de  Bsrekoce.  Richard 
v5e  Bordkoce.  Scsmd  de  Heyn&xsL  Richard  CbeiEx^  aad  Osbert 
Loie  vere  attiKiKd  to  assver  tbe  Abbot  of  G^iistca'  on  a  ofea 
«hv  bv  fbcce  aad  amrs  the\*  esctered  irc  t:  mrmzs  im^szn»Mmz\ 
tbe  cLiTsri  oc  Gooevere  aac  Bfieoeoej-e^  of  the  Abbix  aad  thrcv 
dcwn  a=)d  rooced  op  the  trees  oc  the  Abbccfcorad  sr  the  sarre  asarsh. 
asc  cacsed  hfm  odber  dima^  vEthoct  Bcetace  of  tb?  Abccc  and 
a^^ai:i?c  the  peace. ctc^  aad  whereizL  by  hi?  atQ3tne\-.  be  oocrfiszss 
likU  an   the  aSxesaSd   =:ec  carre  in  tbe  aicresaid  rTa,mer  \xi 


WecraesCiiy  r:  the  week  cc  Fetrtecosc  a£sr  dinret.a  Tear a:£5:?L axad 
cc»»i^  abcct  X'ur  sorce  tress  aad 


<.! 


Moodiv  rse^t  aner  ±ie  :iexsc  oc  Ssrrt  BarTsahas  in 


rx  s^ine  \^2ar,  all  the  aicnnsaxf  rzea  cane  Ear;> 


ire  tmr*   3:*wt:  arx*    r>:csvi  3p    trees  xr?  cce  rzi 


.:'ihTi.T-/*o:'i-  -  i3C  carr»f  ^sesi  cc  wrthcut  dhe 


:  oj!ice  ^-^c  the  Abbrc  arx:  ictirijt  th?  iseace.  ecc:^  wherebr  the 
Abocc  !?cSKed  /a-^.^^^e  r.^  the  Tajae  lo?  asark:5^  aad  therecc  he 

ssit.     Arc   Ivc  aad  all  t2e 


^-. 


their  attorney  and  defend  the  force,  injury,  and  whatsoever  is 
against  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  the  damages  and  every- 
thing, and  they  say  that  in  truth  they  had  common  in  the 
aforesaid  marsh  for  their  cattle,  and  to  collect  their  fuel  (focalium) 
from  the  sedge  (Uche)}  which  grows  in  tlie  same  marsh  ;  and  when 
the  bridges  are  broken  they  ought  to  have  branches  from  the  trees 
growing  in  the  aforesaid  marsh  to  repair  their  bridges,  and  that 
they  have  not  thrown  down,  nor  carried  away,  nor  rooted  up  trees 
belonging  to  the  Abbot  as  he  charges  upon  them,  nor  in  any 
other  manner  than  they  ought  and  have  been  accustomed  to  do 
for  the  repair  of  their  bridges,  [and  that]  they  have  taken  [trees] 
from  the  aforesaid  wood  as  is  alleged  they  fully  defend  against 
the  Abbot  and  his  suit.  And  the  Abbot,  by  his  attorney,  comes 
and  fully  concedes  that  the  said  men  have  common  in  the 
aforesaid  marsh  for  their  cattle,  but  not  to  collect  sedge  (Uchnm) 
for  their  fires,  nor  that  by  right  could  they  carry  away  anything 
therefrom,  and  that  they  threw  down  and  carried  off  the  said  trees 
as  is  aforesaid  he  offers  sufficient  suit,  as  above.  And  because 
the  aforesaid  Ivo  and  the  others  fully  defend  against  the  Abbot 
and  his  suit,  it  is  considered  that  any  one  of  them  should  wage 
his  law  to  the  twelfth  hand^  and  come  with  his  law  before  the 
justices  when  they  shall  come  in  that  part  of  Somerset.  Pledges 
for  the  law  :  Henry  de  Cerum  and  Henry  de  Pakering.  After- 
wards the  Abbot  comes  and  releases  their  law.  Therefore  Ivo 
and  all  the  others  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  to  judgment  with 
the  Abbot. 

573-  The  Abbot  of  Kaynesham  gives  J  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree'  with  Henry  son  of  Reginald  on  a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

574-  Robert  de  Gurnay  confesses  thai  he  owes  Henry  de 
Gant  j^'io  6s.  which  he  should  repay  at  Easter  in  the  27th  year 

'  Ctllu  or  Itiht .-  Sec  Ducange,  "  Gitpss.,"  lii,  Leuhiria. 

*  Whether  ihcrc  were  lo  lie  iwclve  eomputBalora  ot  whelher  the  party  was  lo  \k 
lielped  by  eleven  only  is  nol  clear.  According  \ii  Dr.  Bnuinci  ("  UeuLschc  Kechta- 
eeschichle,''  ii,  3S4).  the  questioD  mudl  be  itDSWeted  sometimes  one  way  and  somelinies 
the  other,  Tlie  inclusive  recltonine  seem*  tD  be  the  older,  but  in  London  during 
the  tluiteenth  century  the  other  reckoning  prevailed.  (I'oUock  and  Maitland,  "Hist. 
Eng.  Law,"  ii,  pi.  5(18,  Dole, )  In  the  last  reported  esse  of  compurgation  the  conrt 
declined  to  say  how  many  helpers  the  defendant  should  produce.  The  defendant  muil 
bring  »icb  number  a«  he  mi);ht  be  advised  ;  and  if  the  plaintiR  objected,  the  court 
would  hear  orgnmenl  on  both  sides.  The  defendant  l^rought  eleven,  but  the  plaintiff 
did  not  proceed  fuilher.      \iiing  v.   WiUiaan  in  1S24,  reported  in  3  B.  and  C.  53S.) 

*  See  "  Somereet  Fines,"  p.  im.  No.  87.  The  matter  of  the  suit  ivas  half  a  hide 
of  land  in  "  Heiilon." 


1 82  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John ;  and  if  he  should  not  do 
[this],  he  grants  that  he  may  be  distrained  by  [his]  lands,  etc 

575.  William  Russel,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  dissei- 
sin against  James  de  Orchyard*,  and  Estinera  (?)his  daughter  (?), 
touching  a  tenement  in  Orchyard,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore 
he  and  his  pledge  to  prosecute,  namely,  William  son  of  William, 
are  in  mercy.* 

576.  The  assize  comes  to  recc^ise  whether  William  de 
Boneviir  unjustly,  etc,  disseised  Robert  de  la  Linde  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Dimington,'  since  the  first,  etc,  and  wherein  it  is 
complained  that  he  disseised  him  of  half  an  acre  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances.  And  William  comes  and  says  nothing 
wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jury  say  that  the 
aforesaid  William  did  disseise  the  aforesaid  Robert  of  the  said 
half  acre,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Robert  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  William  is  in  mercy  by 
pledge.  He  made  fine  for  ^  mark  by  pledge  of  Ralph  de 
Montesoreir.     Damages,  2s. 

577.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Lucy  Malet  and 
Walter  Hamelin  unjustly,  etc,  disseised  Adam  le  Gras  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Dunestor*  and  Wydikumb*,*  since  the  first  crossing, 
etc,  and  wherein  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  one 
messuage  and  two  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances.  And 
Lucy  comes  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should 
remain,  except  nevertheless  that  she  says  that  he  never  was  seised 
thereof,  because  a  certain  Elias  the  priest  was  seised  and  held  it 
all  his  life,  and  died  without  an  heir  because  he  was  a  bastard  ;  and 
the  land  and  the  messuage,  after  the  death  of  Elyas,  ought  to 
revert  to  her  as  chief  lady  [of  the  fee],  and  thereon  she  puts  herself 
upon  the  assize.  The  jury  say  that  the  aforesaid  Elyas  held  the 
said  messuage  and  land,  and  died  seised  thereof,  so  that  the 
aforesaid  Adam  never  was  in  seisin  thereof.  Wherefore  they 
say  positively  that  they  did  not  disseise  him.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Lucy  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Adam  is  in 
mercy.     He  is  a  pauper,  and  has  nothing. 

578.  Robert  le  Burgeys,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  dis- 
seisin against  Elyas,  parson  of  Horbloweton,*  and  Juliana  his 
mother  touching  a  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill,  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and   his   pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  William 

^  In  the  margin  is  a  note  '*  wua/.  error.**  *  Dinningtoo. 

'  Dunstcr  and  Withycombe.  *  Hornblotton* 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 83 

Coling  of  Horbloweton  and  Adam   Blund  of  Pylton,  are   in 
mercy. 

579.  Adam  son  of  William,  who  brought  an  assize  of  mort 
d'ancestor  against  Margery  Fitz  Payn  concerning  one  messuage, 
five  acres  of  land,  and  one  acre  of  meadow,  with  the  appurten- 
ances, in  Schipelcary,^  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  William  de  Worthy  and  Nicholas 
de  Bosco,  are  in  mercy. 

580.  Peter  de  Here,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
s^inst  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  concerning  a  tenement  in  Hcnebir, 
does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he,  Peter,  and  his  pledges,  namely, 
William  son  of  Adam  de  Ber'  and  John  de  Pillok  [are  in  mercy]. 
He  made  fine  for  i  mark  for  himself  and  his  pledges  by  pledge 
of  Roger  de  Cheselade  and  Hugh  de  Pophiir. 

581.  Idonea  wife  of  Roger  de  Whyttokesmede  puts  in  her 
place  Roger  her  husband  against  Thomas  de  la  Lude  and  Amice 
his  wife  on  a  plea  of  covenant,  etc.,  and  against  Ralph  Cole  on  a 
plea  of  land,  etc. 

582.  Amice  sister  of  her,  Idonea,  puts  in  her  place  Thomas 
her  husband  against  Roger  de  Whyttokesmede  and  Idonea  his 
wife  on  a  plea  of  covenant,  etc. 

583.  Sara  wife  of  Stephen  Michel  puts  in  her  place  Stephen 
her  husband  against  William  de  Gunne  and  Christiana  his  wife 
and  against  William  de  Insula  on  pleas  of  land. 

Memb,  7. 

584.  Clarice  daughter  of  Richard  son  of  Ernisius,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  mort  d'ancestor  concerning  one  hide  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Stok'  against  William  de  Monteacuto, 
does  not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledge,  Henry  Arthur 
of  Melleburn',  [are]  nevertheless  [in  mercy],  although  the  other 
pledge  has  died.     And  William  may  go  without  a  day. 

585.  Robert  de  Bosco,  Michael  de  Berton,  John  de  Bonevill, 
Faremus  de  Bolon',  four  knights  sent  to  Edith,  wife  of  William 
de  Haveberg',  who  essoins  herself  de  malo  lecti  against  William 
de  Donemere,  at  Haveberg*,  come  and  testify  that  she  is  sick  in 
bed,  and  that  they  saw  her  on  the  vigil  of  SS.  Fabian  and 
Sebastian,*  and  that  they  gave  her  a  day  in  one  year  from  the 
day  of  view  of  her,  at  the  Tower  of  London. 

*  Probably  Gary  Fitzpayne  in  Charlton  Makerel. 
^  The  day  of  these  Saints  was  the  20th  January. 


^Lcc:":   It   3.i*^iCr.':*;.   ^v:r".  5iiii«:r    iii    ^^i^i^  ^v'lrr.   Hsi^ 
r.:e  *•:  -^  -Zj^z    l.'  :    -  -  -  '■  -^  ^-^  ^**i*  ^  *-'—  ^^   --*-'»^  -»    — »i   rtfrr 


■■^  *     *  JS-  .  ■ 


'1-  * 


■    >*t-  %   ^      ..^   '-      T    V 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  1 85 


warranty  Scholastica,  sister  and  heir  of  the  aforesaid  Henr>\ 
Let  her  have  her  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into  the 
county  of  Dorset.^ 

589.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John,  Dean  of 
Welles,  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Mabel  Kyte  of  her  free  tenement 
in  Bydesham,^  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.,  and  wherein  it  is 
complained  that  he  disseised  her  of  sixteen  acres  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances.  And  the  Dean  comes  by  his  bailiff  and  says 
that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because  Stephen,  the 
father  of  Mabel,  gave  the  aforesaid  land  a  long  time  before  his 
death,  so  that  she,  Mabel,  never  was  seised  thereof,  and  thereon 
he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  And  Philip  Corbyn  and  Henry 
Corbyn,  two  recognitors,  are  in  mercy  because  they  do  not  come. 
The  jurors  say  that  the  Dean  did  not  disseise  her  of  any  free 
tenement,  because  she  was  never  seised  thereof.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  the  Dean  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Mabel  is 
in  mercy.     She  is  a  pauper. 

590.  The  Prior  of  Saint  Swythun  of  Wynton,  who  brought  a 
writ  whether  he  and  his  predecessors  were  wont  to  common  with 
their  cattle  at  Bledon  and  at  Schiplade,  which  is  member  of 
Bledon,  on  the  land  of  Adam  le  Waleys  belonging  to  the  manor 
of  Hocton^  and  on  the  land  of  the  same  Adam  at  Hillesbergh', 
which  is  member  of  Hocton,  as  the  same  Adam  says;  or  whether 
[neither]  the  aforesaid  Prior  nor  his  predecessors  ever  com moncd 
there,  nor  at  any  time  were  accustomed  to  common  there,  as 
the  same  Prior  says,*  comes  by  his  attorney  and  will  not  sue. 
Therefore  the  Prior  is  in  mercy.  Inquire  as  to  the  names  of  his 
pledges,  because  we  had  not  the  original  writ. 

591.  William  son  of  Roger,  who  brought  a  writ  of  mort 
d'ancestor  concerning  half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Hunton,  against  Philip  Talebot,  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he,  William,  and  his  pledges,  namely,  Robert  Maris- 
callus  of  Haminton*  and  John  Linoys  of  the  same,  [are  in 
mercy]. 

592.  Thomas   de   Cyrnecestr'*  and   Aubrey   his  wife   were 

»  Marginal  note  "  Dors'."  ^  Biddesham.  ^  Hutton. 

**  This  must  be  a  mistake  for  Adam.  It  would  seem  that  the  names  of  the  Prior 
and  Adam  ought  to  be  transposed  in  respect  of  the  two  contrary  allegations. 

'^  In  21  lien.  III.,  one  Thomas  de  Cyrencestria  was  defendant  to  a  claim  by 
Rich  ard,  Earl  of  Cornwall,  as  guardian  of  Baldwin,  nephew  of  William  de  Rivcis, 
Earl  of  Devon,  to  the  advowson  of  Trowlegha  or  Thn^wleigh.  (See  Bracton's  "  Note 
Book,"  edited  by  Prof.  Maitland,  pi.  1 172.) 

2   B 


1 86  SOMERSETSHIRE  PI^AS. 

summoned  to  answer  Robert  son  of  John  and  Robert  son  of 
Godfrey  on  a  plea  why  they  deforced  the  aforesaid  Robert  and 
Robert  of  the  reasonable  part  which  fell  to  them  of  the  inherit- 
ance which  was  of  Roeer  del  Ausnav,  kinsman  of  the  said 
Robert  and  Robert,  and  uncle  of  her,  Aubre>%  in  Cherleton'* 
Kamiir,  whose  heirs  thev  are  and  who  lately  died,  as  it  is  said. 
And  wherein  it  is  alleged  that  the  aforesaid  Thomas  deforced 
them  of  a  fourth  part  of  two  vdrgates  of  land  and  a  fourth  part 
of  two  parts  of  one  Wrgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances. 
And  Thomas  and  Aubrey,  by  the  attorney"  of  .-XulKey,  come  and 
defend  their  right  now,  ete,  and  say  that  they  ought  not  to 
ansisi*er  them  on  this  \*Tit,  because  the  aforesaid  Rc^er  del 
Ausnay  had  a  certain  elder  brother,  Jordan  b\'  name,  the  father 
of  Aubrey,  and  they  say  that  she,  Aubrej',  is  nearer  heir  of  him, 
Roger,  than  the  aforesaid  Robert  and  Robert,  who  claim  for  the 
reason  that  they  are  issue  of  sisters  of  Roger ;  and  albeit  that 
they  say  that  the  said  land  ought  not  to  pass*  to  her,  Aubrey,  for 
that  she  cannot  be  lady  and  heir  Jomzma  ei  kens\^  she,  Aubrey, 

*  Oiukton  Hofvthonae. 

*  r.rf'ti  s  die  wvTvi  ose^i.  bat :.-»  Kv«t  s  scaiorhr  rffct  terhiica!  word  to  emptoj 
sow. 

-  This  refexs  tc  ilie  cmioos  rale  *'  mtnj  fiX^ss  is^  JErmrVn/  rf  idwrs^"  wUch  in 
Glr7.TiI!  $  utne  iBk.  rij.  c  I)  anJ  lain gsve rise  ;a qoestnos  vhadi taxed  the  viaiom  of 
fii-  :s  ^  Isarced  Livi^rsL  For  ecisipie, i  tsther,  O,  wiA  three  »is,  .\,  B, lai  C,  of 
w*t  vri  A  B  the  eWes.  eofeods  B,  oai  B  dies  with-xit  iasae.  die  oches  aoniita^,  wfco 
»  t3  iiheri: — O,  A.  of  C  ?  If  O  c^Tots^  A  wiU  sit,  **  As  Wxd  yea  cuaot  be  bar,"* 
r~^  C  in  hss  fzrz  =sty  say  ;Kir  the  like  obfectioQ  mtll  spfitT  to  A  oa  the  vkach  of  his 
iiihir.  O.  Gliavul  seenis  :o  hire  A.xs^:  thi:  O  ccuU  bcc  iaheri:  :  ihat  A  BU|;h:, 
l-c:  wxiM  hiT^e  ::>  give  ap  the  liaJ  t.^  C  en  0$  ^kadu  aad  hs  omn  cooseraes: 
5acccss'>c  t^  the  ^.x-iship.  Again,  sapoose  thit  on  Os  «iea£h  A  kis  a  sott.  X-  Xow 
thx:  A  bjs  Sjcccre  Iori,*aEc=s:  he  ^.re  ap  ihe  Iiad  to  C,  or  to  hs  ova  sue,  X  ?  iThis 
•X^ascnti.c  e>  pc:  L-.  FoCfcxi  a=^i  >Ia:tLirid,  '*HJst.  of  E^lah  Law,"  ii,  pk  jSS^ 
TSe  cxse  in  an  r.-LI  seetss  to  a:2sver  this  qaesticn  :  Aabrer's  dia^hxr  »  pnsforeti  ?> 
:be  Jssd-  cf  the  S2$:;i5  of  Rv\?k  viel  A-saay,  Bat  thas  rite  w»  doc  tc  be  apf£ied 
:r-.'ess  b:cii^  hii  :eer:  takes  roc  the  Imvi.  "  Ji-u"  .■auivaaic  i^imsfXMm  mm  iriBmescit 
«^-.    f-r. T^au.**.-   .-an  .*:.«.•  xSzx    u^.SiJ  .vyTBinr  zifS    ^^sptj^  mc  frrm/iwMseMi  frrmfCtr 

rrSTx*:^  -v-TTsrraw  .-."■*^r»  j-a.-  ili-j:  •-.■»-: t-rr  mrm  jwfyrt:  .-mwc  JJMJi^j'^  si  --i:  itrts  ft 

/•"-•'sna.  j-w  fkT^s  rx  ^mum  mau.aks  sz:  j^Mimr^  nr-'  KaJau"  /ac"  fkzse  amn,  ^-mm  iti" 

/'.-"^— v^*   ---w.TT^.*:-* '"    Bract-,  5x  24  ;  see  also  5x  65K  ini  3o*  ^77'^     Wlti:  was  the 

.:r^.r-  :( the  nie  ?     The  leaitie-i  aath.cs  :i  the  **  Hsroqr  cf  Er^lssh  Law  ~  ip^  joo) 

Lsoiss  >eT-nI  thi»:ri£s*  amd  prefer  :?  rt^rari  i:  is  the  nsalt  of  "'a  scr^;^  j^arast 

ec^-ts  :c  Tnr=r>ci~r=re.'"     The  lasi  »h:vh  his  beeii  carteu  oat  cf  dhf  raxrzal  es 

c  -Ji'^  recet::  :c  a  tvct^^  sen  .*<a^:  :>x  tc  ^?  back  to  the  isrscSxr,  sc  k?c^  xs  t 

->  1  7:  _zcer  >cc-      1 3  Bnct.^n's  tinre  it  5ee=2S  :?  hire  beeci  cvmssca  :  whea  a 


cnfe'jce'i  i^s  y-.^cz^r  sec  six  t :  rak?  his  h-.cr-.ige  see  £b:3ct •  3" v  i^T^     TSe  -re  25, 
ii:«iTir.  -;-T  x-ur.-:  histrrr  nrw.     I:  bcca=:;  jbstie^e  wien  the  s:xr*:e     :  i^rac 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS  1 87 

has  a  certain  daughter,  Cassandra  by  name,  to  whom  the  said 
land  ought  to  pass.  And  Robert  and  Robert  do  not  offer  to 
contradict  this.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Thomas  and 
Aubrey  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Robert  and  Robert  are  in 
mercy.     Let  them  be  in  custody.^ 

593.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Geoffry  de 
Barinton',  father  of  John,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  one 
hundred  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Cristesham,  on 
the  day,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  William  de  Mohun 
holds,  who  does  not  come,  and  he  was  resummoned.  Therefore 
let  the  assize  proceed  against  him  in  default.  The  jurors  say  that 
the  aforesaid  Geoffry  died  seised  of  the  said  one  hundred  acres 
of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  as  of  fee,  and  that  he,  John,  was 
seised  of  the  said  land  after  the  death  of  Geoffry,  and  that  he 
sold  it  to  one  William  le  Tort.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
John  should  take  nothing  by  that  assize,  and  should  be  in  mercy 
for  his  false  claim.     He  is  a  pauper. 

594.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hugh  Ran- 
devin,  uncle  of  Peter  son  of  Walter,  was  seised  in  his  demesne 
etc.,  of  two  messuages  and  two  acres  of  land  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Dunestar',  which  land  and  which  messuages  Alpesia, 
who  was  the  wife  of  Hugh  Randevin,  holds,  who  does  not  come 
and  she  was  resummoned.  Therefore  let  the  assize  proceed 
against  her  in  default.  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Hugh 
Randevin  died  seised  of  the  said  messuages  and  land  as  of  fee 
and  since  the  time,*  and  that  the  said  Peter  is  his  next  heir 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Peter  should  recover  his  seisin, 
and  Alphesia  is  in  mercy. 

595-  Jordan  son  of  David  de  Harpeford*,  who  brought  a  writ 
against  William  de  Hamme  concerning  the  diversion  of  a  certain 
water  course  in  Langeford'  to  the  injury  of  his  free  tenement  in 
the  same  vill,  came  and  withdrew  himself  Therefore  he  and 
his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for  him- 
self and  his  pledges  for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  him,  William. 
Afterwards  the  said  William  comes  and  confesses  that  he 
diverted  the  said  water  course,  and  therefore  the  sheriff  is  notified 
that  the  water  [course]  should  be  as  it  ought  and  was  wont  to 
be.     And  afterwards  the  same  J * 

'   "c^,"  that  is  lusfodianiur^  in  the  margin. 

'^  Of  limitation. 

^  Here  the  entry  ends  abruptly. 


1 88  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb,  jd. 

596.  Hugh  Wambestrong'  seeks  against  Richard  le  Teyntrer* 
oie  messuage  u-ith  the  appurtenances  in  the  suburb  of  Bristoll' 
as  his  right,  etc^  and  whereof  a  certain  Belesor,  aunt*  {arnica)  of 
Hugh,  was  seised  as  of  fee  and  in  right  in  the  time  King  John, 
taking  therefrom  profits  to  the  value  of  \  mark.  And  from  her, 
Belesor,  the  right  in  that  land  descended  to  one  Thomas  as 
brother  and  heir,  and  from  him.  Thomas,  Hugh  had  [itj  who  now 
claims  as  son  and  heir,  and  that  such  is  his  right  he  offers,  etc 
And  Richard  comes  and  defends  his  right  now,  etc.,  and  the 
seisin  of  the  aforesaid  Belesor,  and  sa>'s  that  he  ought  not  to 
answer  him  on  this  writ  because  he  does  not  hold  the  entirety 
of  that  messuage,  for  a  certain  Thomas  Lor^  [Lomgus)  holds 
thereof  eight  feet  of  land.  Aften^-ards  Richard  comes  and 
vouches  to  warrant\*  the  Prior  of  the  Hospital  of  St.  John  of 
Radecli\*e,  who  is  present,  and  warrants  him,  and  defends  his 
[Hugh's]  right  and  the  seisin  of  the  aforesaid  Belesor.  and  e\'er\'- 
thing,  etc,  and  puts  himself  upon  a  jur\-  of  the  \-ill  of  Radecii\*e, 
whether  he  hax'e  the  greater  right  to  hold  that  messuage,  as  of 
the  gift  of  one  Hugh  le  Drave,  ancestor  of  him,  Hugh  Wambe- 
strong, or  whether  the  same  Hugh  should  have  it  in  demesne, 
and  the  same  Hugh  [does]  like^Ji-ise.  Afterwards  they  arc 
agreed  by  leax-e  and  the  Prior  gi\-es  \  mark  for  the  licence  to 
agree.* 

597.  John  de  Alra  gix'es  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  mith 
E\-a  de  Chumlegh*  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  pledge  of  Simon  Gx'ain 
of  Xorthkur>\ 

598.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hi^h  de  la 
W'atere  unjustly,  etc  disseised  Henry  de  la  Watere  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Crokenepiir,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.  and  whereon 
it  is  complained  that  he  disseised  him  of  one  messuage  and  of 
half  a  \-ir^te  of  land  with  the  appurtenances.  And  Hugh  does 
not  come,  and  he  was  attached  bv  Richard  Ko\"terel  and  William 
de  Wellesr.  Therefore  thev  are  in  mocv.  And  let  the  assize 
proceed  against  him  by  defaulL  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid 
Hu^h  did  not  disseise  the  aforesaid  Henr%-  of  any  free  tenement 
in  Crokkerpiir.  for  Henr\-  ne\-er  had  any  free  tenement  in  that 
\-:IL     Therefore  it  is  consicerec  that  Hugh  [may  go]  uithcut  a 


T=— :irLcr  =  i>>£r-  -  See  -nfcV,  acce  :r  X»x  456. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  1 89 

day,  and   Henry  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim  by  pledge  of 
Geoffry  Vassal.^     Let  him  be  in  custody.* 

599.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Ralph  de  Monte- 
soreir  unjustly,  etc.,  raised  a  certain  dyke  in  Wythlaketon'*  to 
the  injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Agnes  de  Millers  in  the  same 
vill  within  the  summons  of  the  eyre,  etc.*  And  Ralph  comes 
and  says  that  he  has  raised  no  dyke  to  the  injury  of  the  free 
tenement,  etc.,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 
The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Ralph  did  raise  a  certain  part 
of  the  dyke  to  the  injury,  etc.,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  such  part  should  be  thrown  down  at  the  cost  of 
Ralph  and  by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  that  he  should  be  in  mercy 
for  the  disseisin  by  the  pledges  of  John  Sarazin  and  William  de 
Boneviir.  But  they  say  that  as  to  a  certain  part  of  the  said 
dyke  he  did  not  disseise  her  within  the  summons,  etc.,  for  he 
raised  the  dyke  before  the  summons  was  made.  Therefore  Ralph 
[may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Agnes  is  in  mercy.     Damages,  6d, 

600.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  le 
Frankelayn  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  John  le  Frankelain  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Weleheton',  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.,  and  whereon 
it  is  complained  that  he  disseised  him  of  half  a  virgate  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances.  And  Richard  comes  and  alleges 
nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors  say 
that  the  aforesaid  Richard  did  disseise  the  aforesaid  John  of  the 
land,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  John 
should  recover  his  seisin  by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  Richard  is  in 
mercy  by  pledge  of  Geoffry  de  la  Wyke  and  Humphrey  of  the 
same  and  John  de  Stanton'.     Damages,  i  mark. 

601.  Amice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Humphrey  Michel,  seeks 

^  Notwithstanding  that  Henry  found  a  pledge,  he  appears  to  have  been  ordered 
into  custotly,  for  in  the  margin  appears  "  c^."  No  doubt  the  statement  as  to  the 
pletlge  was  added  later. 

^  In  the  margin. 

^  White  Lackington. 

*  Written  in  full  this  phrase  would  run — "  infra  sumtfionitiofum  itituris  justici- 
(trior un:.^^  In  the  case  of  a  disseisin,  while  the  justices  were  on  their  eyre,  they  had 
power  to  issue  a  writ  on  the  application  of  the  party  disseised,  and  it  was  not  necessary 
to  resort  to  the  King's  chancery.  But  in  such  case  it  was  necessary  to  state  carefully 
whether  the  disseisin  had  been  made  during  the  eyre,  or  whether  partly  before  and 
partly  during  the  eyre,  in  order  that  the  writ  might  agree  with  the  complaint  (Bract, 
fo.  236).  But  it  appears  from  the  record  of  this  case  that  if  the  disseisin  was  in  part 
before  the  eyre  was  summoned,  such  part  could  not  form  the  subject  of  relief  upon  a 
writ  issued  by  the  justices.  Here  Agnes  recovers  damages  as  to  port  of  the  injury  ; 
for  the  other  part  she  is  wrong  in  her  procedure,  and  is  amerced. 


I90  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

against  Geoffiy  de  Langeleg*  one-third  part  of  one  virgate  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Merlince,  as  her  dower,  etc. 
And  Geoffry  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  Reginald  son  of 
Humphrey,  who  is  present,  and  warrants  him,  and  says  that  he 
will  willingly  give  her  her  dower.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  Geoffry  may  hold  in  peace,  and  that  Amice  should  have 
land  of  Reginald  to  the  value  of  the  said  third  part 

602.  Sabina  daughter  of  Richard  Revel  w*as  attached  to 
answer  William  de  Oly  on  a  plea  that  she  should  observe 
towards  him  the  fine*  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King 
whiclinow  is  between  Richard  Doyly,  father  of  the  said  William, 
whose  heir,  etc  [querent],  and  herself,  impedient  of  one  hide  and 
half  a  vii^ate  and  three  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Hambrug*,  whereof  the  chirograph,  etc.  ;  and  whereon  it 
is  complained  that  while  she  ought  to  warrant  the  aforesaid 
land,  with  the  appurtenances,  against  all  men  by  the  service  of 
one  pair  of  gilt  spurs  or  (>d,  and  one  pound  of  pepper  for  all  ser- 
vices, except  forensic  service,  etc,  she,  contrary  to  the  same  fine, 
distrains  him  to  do  suit  at  her  court  every  three  weeks,  whereby 
he  is  injured  and  has  suffered  damage  to  the  value  of  6cxf.,  and 
thereof  he  produces  suit,  etc  And  Sabina  comes  and  says  that 
she  fully  admits  the  chirograph  and  whatever  is  contained  in 
it,  and  that  she  in  no  wise  comes  to  contradict  it ;  but  she  says 
that  she  seeks  nothing  against  him  except  that  he  should  do 
suit  in  her  court  as  he  ought  and  is  wont  to  do,  to  wit,  when  the 
writ  of  our  lord  the  King  is  pleaded  in  the  same  court,  or  a  thief 
is  there  to  be  judged.  And  Sabina  puts  in  her  place  Robert  de 
Dillington.  Afterwards  they  are  agreed  by  leave,  and  the 
agreement*  is  such  that  the  aforesaid  Sabina  releases  to  William 
the  aforesaid  suit  in  every  three  weeks,  and  that  for  the  rest  he 
should  do  suit  at  the  said  court  only  when  the  writ  of  our  lord 
the  King  should  be  pleaded  there  or  a  thief  should  be  there  to 
be  judged.  And  that  William's  villeins  should  do  suit  on  two 
law-days  {lahedayes)  in  the  year. 

603.  The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  cause  the  cattle 
of  Henry  de  Gant,  which  Margaret  de  Sumery  took  and  unjustly 
detains,  etc,  to  be  replevied  to  him  ;  and  touching  which  it  is 

*  See  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  46,  No.  61  (8  Hen.  III).  Sabina  is  there  describetl 
as  >*ifc  of  Henry  del  Ortyay.  Kichanl  is  called  "  de  Oilly."  The  land  is  that 
**  which  WilHam  de  Mariscis,  Robert  de  la  liull,  and  Wakeline  de  Mariscis  held 
there." 

'  I  do  not  find  a  record  of  this  in  '*  Someiset  Fines." 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  19I 

complained  that  she  took  thirteen  oxen,  etc,  and  that  by  the 
taking  and  detention  he  is  injured,  and  has  suffered  damage  to 
the  value  of  60s,  And  Margery,  by  her  attorney,  comes  and 
defends  that  [she  took]  any  cattle  of  Henry  unjustly ;  but  she 
says  that  the  same  Henry  holds  certain  land  of  her  in  Stokland* 
which  owes  i6^/.  a  year  at  the  sheriff's  tourn,  and  which  rent  was 
in  arrear  for  four  years  last  past,  and  thereof  she  produces  suit, 
etc.  And  Henry  comes  and  defends  against  her  and  her  suit, 
and  fully  defends  that  he  does  not^  owe  her  for  the  aforesaid 
tenement  16^.  by  the  year,  nor  even  did  that  service  to  her,  nor 
that  she  was  ever  in  seisin  of  that  service  after  the  same  Henry 
was  seised  of  the  said  tenement,  and  this  he  offers  to  defend 
against  her  as  the  court  shall  consider.  And  Margaret,  by  her 
attorney,  comes  and  says  that  the  said  tenement  in  Stokland*  is 
of  her  fee,  and  that  it  owes  by  the  year  i6d.  as  is  aforesaid,  and 
she  says  that  she  was  in  seisin  of  the  said  rent  of  i6^/.  pay- 
able at  the  sheriff's  tourn.  Afterwards  it  is  shown  clearly  that 
the  said  Henry  does  not  hold  the  said  tenement  of  the  said 
Margaret,  but  of  one  Andrew  Luterel  and  his  heirs.  Therefore 
it  is  considered  that  Margaret  should  not  distrain  the  said  Henry 
for  the  said  i6d,,  and  should  be  in  mercy  for  her  unjust  vexation 
{injtista  vexacione\  and  let  her  satisfy  his  damages.    2  marks.^ 

Meinb.  8. 

604.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  hun- 
dredman,  Richard  the  scrjeant,  John  son  of  Christiana,  John 
Bus,  Walter  Cole,  Walter  Pilk,  Walter  le  Franceis,  Ralph 
Policon,  William  Gyan,  Hugh  de  Curilad',  John  le  Vel,  William 
Triche,  Walter  de  Boscho,  Roger  Arthur,  Henry  Edwin,  Henry 
the  Serjeant,  Matthew  Scute,  Thomas  the  horn  maker  (Je  cor- 
neysier)^  Robert  Rugge,  William  Rugge,  Walter  Blund  {le 
Blund),  Richard  Erbier,  John  de  la  Lane,  Walter  del  Perier, 
Jordan  Coppe,  Robert  Nigel,  Adam  de  Myriden,  Richard  le 
Child,  Philip  de  Myridun,  Richard  Curiot,  William  Pode,  Simon 
le  Sunnal',  Walter  the  fisherman  {le  pescur\  Nicholas  Swift, 
Nigeir  Knyt,  Henry  de  la  Fenne,  Robert  de  Mere,  Henry  de 
Mere,  Stephen  Chinne,  Reginald  the  weaver  {le  telier\^  Richard 

•  This  and  the  following  negatives  in  this  plea  would  seem  to  be  redundant. 
-  In  the  margin. 

•'  *'  Corneser,  maker  of  horns  ":  Kelham  ;  or  jx^rhaps,  corvcysier,  the  cordwainer. 
^  Ducange,  **  Gloss/*     Kelham  has  **  Tele,  a  web." 


192  SOMULstETSKIKI.  FLEAS. 

Edce.  Rdbcxt  Edde.  Grrert  Rc^c  Jcfci  dc  Hindudc  Wahcr  his 
son,  TbofTAs  Ruf-fel,  Jctr.  Al-a-ard  Rc^bert  Alward, 
Cctcrel.  Sprigand'ce  Hirje'-aroe:  Ricrirc  de  Ins 
of  Tfccnias,  N:<hc!a5  de  Cirilarxf,  Pccer  de  Calltk*.  N5cfaoIas  Bore- 
w2Lc\  Walter  de  SIv^i.  Jchr  de  Cierrejcg!:'.  Gilbert  de  Bong- 
^-ax-n,  Ic-hn  the  miller  .>  iK^dmrr  S'  Rcbert  Bc^ik-^  Edward  the 
miller  ».V  wa«f»r-7-i.-  Jc>ir.  the  haj.-a-ard.  Hertrj-  Ccrsess.  Adam 
Curteiys.  Philip  !e  Iver.r.e,  Richari  Britel,  Rcbcrt  E^od.  Robert 
Chamoerei?.  Rc^er  B-r!--aIi.  T:tr.  the  tailor  *>  T^rmitK:iar\ 
Robert  del  Peher.  R:bert  ce  Pilemeir,  Rcbeit*  Baldcwin', 
Thon:a>  BocfT»-a\T..  Re^ir^  i  B2:rat.  Philio  de  Boscfco,  Walter 
Chapcian.  Robert  the  ser^ear.t.  Walter  de  Pcra.  WiLiaxn  Pik\ 
Robert  de  Lit>tcie,  Richard  Belfrere.  J:fc=  Ehirand.  Walter 
the  palmer  '  U  pa^iKir  .  R c-bert  de  Mere,  O^bcrt  his  brother. 
Roser  de  Mere.  Osbert  the  fer-ear.t,  Stet:<:e=  hL<  bn:<her.  Walter 
de  Mere.  Jc-hr.  de  Mere,  R  rben  Pcde,  William  Smethe,  Ranu!ph 
the  Ccrr.ishmar.  Crrz^'^lciJ.  William  Mert  Arnald  Merfc. 
Walter  Pode,  Ro^er  Tur.e,  Walter  de  .a  Brechc,  y^:r.  son  of 
Walter.  Richard  !e  P-h:er.  William  le  Puher,  Arr-ad*  Cotcrel, 

R-VKard  Me^h.  I-^-  -=•--  '^  R-oerL  I-hr  ^-c  of  Richard. 
Wr.liam  de  Ri:>-.  unjustly,  etc.,  difiei^ed  Xjocy  Malet  of  her 
free  teremct:t  ir.  Er^rce.  >irce  the  £r>t  crossir^.  etc  arxi 
-^  herecr.  it  is  crmplained  ths.t  the>-  dissefsed  her  cf  !>rt\-  acres 

:'  mcaicTT.  f:r  whcr.  >he  had  ir.vlc??ed  the  meacr'ar  with  a 
ztn^r.  dyke  ar.d  hid  there  plar.tec  wHlcas  ar.i  ether  trees,  and 
rt.r.r:er.t>.-  there  ^aas  there  ar.  alder-wccd.  all  the  afr^esaid  came 
>J7/L  \rxjai  her  hav.  arc  that  c:  her  mcr..  arc  cast  it  i:i*:-r.  the 
:vke   «•-•  /^.y't^-VTr^r  ;«  f:ssi:.z  LVs  ,  and  afterwards  threw  d^rw-n 

''.sj^Sjtk  i.iin:  rr:s:r2z sTi •:.•  that  c\  ke, ar.d  cirried  cc  a  certain 
ether  part  -::  j^JTr^rj-:  ii-":.:r»:  /..rTx-aff  .zsr^.'rrjzrr^K^  ^  ard  cxrt 
c:-a^  all  th^  trees,  ar.i  thererr.  she  rets  herself  "jprr.  the  assize. 
Ar.d  Her.r\-  the  hur.ire-imir  irrl  all  the  cthir>  ccme,  cxcet)t 
William  frlch,  Robert  Drrl:-^  Raru.ch  the  Ccrr:sh.mar.  •*.> 
C  .rxi.'.r.Wl"  .  Arr.cli    Cctere',  ani   J-:hr. 


And  Robert  Ekrtlct  'iias  attached  by  Herri^-  Lurteif  ar.i  Adam 
Curtei?.  ar.d  Rar.ulph  the  Ccrr.ishmar  was  attach e-i  by  William 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  I93 

le  Merch,  [and]  Arnold  de  Merch  and  Arnold  Cotercl  w;is 
attached  by  William  le  Puher  and  Richard  de  Merch,  and 
John  son  of  Richard  was  attached  by  Arnold  Inthetune  of 
Westhache  and  Richard  le  Puher.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Henry  the  hundred- 
man  and  all  the  others  did  disseise  the  aforesaid  Lucy  of 
the  said  meadow,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  Lucy  should  recover  her  seisin  by  view  of  the  recognitors, 
and  Henry  and  all  the  others  are  in  mercy.  And  let  the 
dyke  be  repaired  at  the  cost  of  all  the  aforesaid  disseisors. 
Damages,  3  marks. 

605.  Nicholas,^  Abbot  of  Glaston*,  seeks  against  Stephen 
the  chamberlain  (camerariiis),  one  messuage  and  one  mill 
and  one  ferling  of  land  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Wryngton, 
as  the  right  of  his  church,  and  in  which  the  said  Stephen  has 
no  entry  unless  through  William,  formerly  Abbot,  etc.,  who 
demised  them  to  him  without  the  assent  of  his  chapter.  And 
Stephen  comes  and  ^ives  up  to  him  [the  Abbot]  the  said  mes- 
suage, mill,  and  land,  and  let  him  be  amerced  because  he  did 
not  give  [them]  up  before.  He  made  fine  for  i  mark  by 
pledge  of  William  de  Estur*. 

606.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Michael  Knoel, 
father  of  Matilda,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  of  one  virgate 
of  land  with  tiie  appurtenances,  in  Westludeford',  on  the  day  on 
which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  John  de  Bonevill'  holds, 
who  comes  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should 
remain,  except  that  he  [Michael],  seven  years  before  his  death, 
gave  up  the  said  land  to  the  aforesaid  John.  The  jurors  say  that 
the  said  Michael  was  not  seised  of  the  land,  with  the  appurte- 
nances, on  the  day  on  which  he  died,  because  four  years  before 
his  death  he  gave  up  the  same  to  the  said  John  because  he  was 
not  able  to  perform  the  service  due  therefor.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  John  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Matilda  is  in 
mercy.  She  is  a  pauper.  Let  her  recover  by  writ  of  right  if  she 
wishes  yperqnirat  sib i  per  brcvc  de  recto  si  voiuerit], 

607.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de 
Holecumb'  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  William  de  Erdinton'  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Kynemerdon'  within  the  summons  of 
the  eyre,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  disseised 
him  of  two  messuages  and  ten  acres  of  land.      And  Henry  does 

*  This  name  ii  written  over  the  wi)rd  "  Ab\>ot." 

2    C 


194  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

not  come,  and  he  was  attached  by  William  de  Welleslegh*  and 
Nicholas  de  Nodariis.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  And  let 
the  assize  proceed  against  him  in  default.  Afterwards  Henry 
comes  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain. 
The  jurors  say  that  the  aforesaid  Henry  did  disseise  William  of 
the  said  messuage  and  land,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  William  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Henry 
is  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  the  said 
William.     Damages,  i2d. 

608.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Adam  de  Aston 
unjustly,  etc.,  raised  a  certain  dyke  in  Aston  to  the  injury  of 
the  free  tenement  of  Robert  de  Chandos  and  Amabel  his  wife 
in  the  same  vill,  since  the  first  crossing,  etc.,  and  whereon  it 
is  complained  that  by  reason  of  that  dyke  he  [Robert]  is  impeded 
in  his  way  to  a  certain  spring  and  in  the  repairing  of  his  own 
dyke,  and  that  he  is  not  able  to  have  common  of  herbage  in  a 
certain  place  where  he  was  always  accustomed  to  common  and 
which  Adam  has  inclosed  by  the  said  dyke.  And  Adam  comes 
and  says  that  he  has  raised  no  dyke  to  the  injury,  etc.,  and 
thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that 
the  aforesaid  Adam  unjustly,  etc.,  raised  the  said  dyke  to  the 
injury,  etc.,  as  the  writ  says,  for  by  reason  of  that  dyke  Robert 
is  impeded  in  that  he  is  not  able  to  repair  his  own  dyke  or  to 
have  a  way  to  the  said  spring,  and,  moreover,  they  say  that  the 
said  Robert  and  other  free  [tenants]  in  the  same  vill  were  wont 
to  common  in  the  place  inclosed  by  the  said  dyke.  Therefore 
it  is  considered  that  the  dyke  should  be  thrown  down  and  should 
be  as  it  was  before,  and  as  it  ought  and  was  wont  to  be.  The 
sheriff  is  notified.  And  Adam  is  in  mercy.  He  made  fine 
for  I  mark  by  his  pledges,  Robert  de  Aldewyk'  and  Jordan 
Laware.     Damages,  2s. 

609.  Eva  de  Trascy  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Fulk  FitzWarrenne  and  William  de  Plukenay  on  a  plea 
of  suit,  etc.,  by  pledge  of  William  himself.  And  the  agreement 
is  such  that  when  the  said  Fulk  and  William  shall  require  of 
the  said  Eva  and  her  men.  as  well  free  as  other  men,  they  will 
do  suit  at  their  hundred  [court]  of  Lambum,  all  men  of  sixteen 
years  of  age,  twice  in  the  year,  to  wit,  at  the  Feast  of  St.  Martin 
and  at  the  term  of  Hokeday  and  at  other  hundred  [courts]  four 
men  and  the  reeve.  Moreover  the  free  tenants  of  the  manor  of 
Esgareston   do   suit   at   all    hundred   [courts]    in    the   year   at 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  195 

Lamb'ne  and  all  others  will  do  their  suits  at  the  aforesaid  hundred 
[courts],  to  wit,  four  men  and  the  reeve  at  the  two  aforesaid 
terms  only,  namely  at  the  Feast  of  St.  Martin  and  at  Hokeday. 
And  for  this  release  {relaxactone),  etc.,  Eva  grants  to  Fulk 
and  William  45*.  sterling  in  every  year,  payable  at  two  terms, 
to  wit,  at  the  feast  of  St.  Martin  and  at  Hokeday.  And  if 
it  shall  happen  that  a  writ  of  our  lord  the  King  shall  be 
pleaded  in  the  said  court  or  a  thief  shall  be  there  to  be 
judged,  then  all  the  men  of  Esgareston  shall  do  suit  as  they 
have  been  accustomed.  And  be  it  known  that  Alan  de  Earn- 
ham,  who  has  a  tenement  in  Esgareston',  was  present  and 
said  that  neither  he  nor  his  men  did,  nor  ever  would  do,  the 
aforesaid  suit. 

610.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Roesia  de 
Monteacuto,  aunt  {amitd)  of  William  the  clerk  [le  Clerc\  was 
seised  in  her  demesne,  etc.,  of  one  messuage,  with  the  appurten- 
ances, in  Monteacuto  on  the  day  on  which,  etc.,  and  whether, 
etc.,  which  messuage  Henry  the  tanner  {le  Tanur)  and  Siffrida 
his  wife  hold,  who  come  and  say  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be 
made  because  the  aforesaid  Roesia  a  long  time  before  her  death 
gave  that  messuage  as  a  marriage  portion  to  the  said  Henry 
with  Siffrida  his  wife  and  thereon  they  put  themselves  upon  the 
assize.  The  jury  say  that  Roesia  was  not  seised  of  the  said 
messuage  on  the  day  on  which  she  died,  and  moreover  that  she 
was  a  villein.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Henry  and  Siffrida 
[may  go]  without  a  day  and  William  is  in  mercy.  He  is  a  pauper 
and  he  is  pardoned  because  he  is  a  clerk. 

61 1.  Roger  Bauderun  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with 
Bona  daughter  of  Matilda  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  pledges  of 
Geoffry  Maureward*  and  William  de  Langeford'.^ 

612.  Richard  de  Gurnay  puts  in  his  place  Robert  his  son, 
against  Stephen  de  Aston  on  a  plea  of  land. 

613.  Isabella,  wife  of  Hugh  Pevercl,  puts  in  her  place  Oliver 
Punchard'  against  Lucy  Malct  and  Richard  de  Cumbe  and 
Elena  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  advowson,  etc. 

Memb,  Zd. 

614.  Ralph  le  Sauvage  of  Cherleton'  gives  i  mark  for  a 
licence  [to  agree]  with  Hugh  Sanzaver  and  Emma  his  wife  on  a 

*  See  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  122,  No.  91.     The  land  is  there  stated  to  be  "  in 
Yuest." 


196  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

plea   of  warranty  of  charter,   etc.,   by  pledge  of  Andrew  de 
Stratton.* 

615.  Katharine,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  le  Theyn,  seeks 
against  Henry  de  Gant  half  an  acre  of  land  with  the  appurten- 
ances in  Aston'  as  her  right  and  marriage  portion,  etc,  and  in 
which  he  has  no  entry  unless  by  William  le  Theyn,  formerly 
Katharine's  husband,  who  demised  it  to  him,  whom  she  herself, 
etc.,*  and  thereof  she  produces  suit,  etc.  And  Henry  comes  and 
defends  her  right  and  such  entry,  and  says  that  he  has  no  entry 
by  William  le  Theyn  but  by  one  Robert  son  of  Bernard,  who 
gave  him  the  land  in  pure  and  perpetual  alms,  and  he  proffers 
Robert's  charter  which  testifies  this.  And  Katharine  cannot 
deny  this.  Therefore  Henry  [may  go]  without  a  day  and 
Katharine  is  in  mercy.     She  is  a  pauper. 

616.  Robert  de  Aston  was  summoned  to  answer  the  Prioress 
of  Caniton'*  on  a  plea  that  he  should  restore  a  certain  stream  to 
its  proper  course  in  Caninton',  which  William  de  Aston,  brother 
of  Robert,  whose  heir,  etc.  [he  is]  unjustly,  etc.,  diverted  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  the  Prioress  in  Caniton'.  And 
Robert  does  not  come,  but  Robert  de  Aston,  son  of  the  said 
Robert,  whom  [he  put]  in  his  place  by  four  knights  sent,  etc,* 
comes  and  says  that  he  [Robert  the  father]  will  willingly  restore 
the  said  stream  to  its  proper  course,  etc.  Therefore  the  sheriff 
is  ordered  that  he  should  send  thither  twelve  [men]  whether 
knights,  etc.  to  restore,  etc,  and  let  them  come  on  Wednesday 
to  testify,  etc* 

617.  John  de  Kynewardcston'  the  hayward  was  summoned 
to  answer  the  Prior  of  Bermundes'  [concerning]  one  messuage 
and  eleven  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Kynewar- 
deston',*  in  which  he  [John]  has  no  entry  unless  by  Walter  de 
Ditton',  formerly  bailiff  of  the  Prior,  who  demised  them  to  him 
without  the  assent  and  will  of  the  Prior  and  his  Chapter.  And 
John  comes  and  says  that  he  has  entry  by  one  '  by  name, 
formerly   chamberlain  to  the   said  house   of  Bermundes',  who 

*  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  121,  No.  84,  and  sec  an/e  No.  515. 

'  The  full  rendering  of  this  phra.*^.'  would  be  '*  cut  ipsa  in  vita  nta  contradicere 
n-yn  potuit  ut  dicity'*  appropriate  words  to  use  in  a  suit  by  a  widow  in  respect  of  lands 
demised  by  her  huslnnd  without  her  consent  (see  Bract.,  fo.  318  and  fo.  321b).  She 
may  say  that  in  his  lifetime  she  had  no  will  of  her  own. 

^  Cannington,  near  Hriiigwaler. 

*  Rol>crt,  the  defendant,  was  evidently  kept  away  from  court  by  sickness. 
That  the  work  has  been  done.  •  Kilmersdon. 

"  The  name  b  not  filled  in  on  the  roll. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  I97 

independently  of  the  Prior  demised  them  to  him.  Therefore  it 
is  considered  that  the  Prior  should  recover  his  seisin  and  John 
is  in  mercy.     Let  him  be  in  custody. 

618,  Margery  de  Sumery/  by  her  attorney,  seeks  against 
Henry  de  Gant  a  third  part  of  the  manor  of  Pulet,  with  the 
appurtenances,  as  her  dower,  etc.  And  Henry  comes  and 
vouches  to  warranty  Robert  de  Gurnay*  by  his,  Robert's,  charter, 
which  he  [Henry]  proffers,  and  which  witnesses  that  the  same 
Robert  when  he  was  [put]  in  full  seisin  and  power  by  our  lord 
the  King  of  all  his  lands  and  tenements,  gave  and  granted  in 
free,  pure  and  perpetual  alms  to  God,  the  Blessed  Mary  and  the 
Blessed  Mark  and  the  Master  of  the  Almonry  {eleviosinarie)  in 
Billcswyk'^  and  his  successors  in  perpetuity  for  the  support  of 
the  said  Master,  the  Manor  of  Puolet*  with  all  its  appurtenances, 
etc.,  and  that  he  and  his  heirs  would  warrant  the  said  Manor 
with  its  appurtenances  to  the  said  Master  and  his  successors  in 
free,  pure  and  perpetual  alms  against  all  men.  And  Robert 
comes  and  says  that  he  ought  not  to  warrant  the  said  Manor  to 
him  for  he  [Robert]  never  was  seised  thereof,  so  that  he  was 
able  to  give  or  sell  the  manor  to  any  one,  and  he  craves 
judgment,  whether  he  ought  to  warrant  him  while  he  himself 
never  was  seised  of  the  said  manor.  And  Henry  says  that 
by  the  charter  which  he  proffers  [Robert]  ought  to  warrant 
the  said  manor  to  him,  because,  he  says,  that  even  if  he,  Robert, 
were  never  seised  of  the  said  manor,  yet  he  had  the  writ  of  our 
lord  the  King  to  have  his  seisin,  and  inasmuch  as  it  is  contained 
in  his  charter  that  he  and  his  heirs  ought  to  warrant  the  said 
manor,  he  craves  judgment.  Afterwards  the  .said  Robert  comes 
and  warrants  Henry  and  says  that  she  ought  not  to  have  dower 
thereout,  because  she  has  more  in  dower  of  the  land  which  was 
oP  [her  husband]. 

*  Widow  of  Ralph  de  Someri  and  second  wife  of  Maurice  dc  Gaunt. 
'  See  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  115,  No.  61. 

'  This  was  the  church  and  hospital  of  the  Virgin  and  St.  Mark,  otherwise  Gnunt's, 
in  Billeswick,  in  Bristol.  What  remains  of  the  Imilding  is  now  the  Mayor's  Chapel  on 
College  Green.  See  **St.  Mark's  or  The  Mayoi's  Chapel,"  by  W.  R.  Barker,  in 
which  the  charters  of  Maurice  and  Rol)ert  de  Gaunt  are  set  out.  The  reference  to 
Rol>ert's  charter,  taken  from  Dugdale,  *'cart.  61  Hen.  III.,  m.  15,**  must  be  wrong. 

-*  Paulet. 

*  The  entry  ends  here  as  if  the  clerk  were  waiting  for  the  name  of  Margery's 
husl)and  to  complete  his  record.  Robert  means  th  »t  he  ought  not  to  have  to  find 
land  of  his  own  equivalent  to  the  third  port  which  Mai^cry  claimed  out  of  the  manor, 
in  respect  of  which  he  was  obliged  lo  fulfil  his  warranty,  because  she  had  already  lull 
dower  out  of  other  lands,  which  formed  part  of  her  late  husband's  estate. 


198  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

619.  Sabina  daughter  of  Richard  Revel,  seeks  against  Henry 
de  Cerne  half  a  virgate  of  land  and  one  messuage  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  Lapse,  which  ought  to  revert  to  her  as  her  escheat 
for  that  Hugh  dc  Montesorcl  who  held  that  land  and  messuage 
of  her,  was  a  bastard  and  died  without  an  heir.  And  Henry 
comes  and  defends  her  right,  etc.,  and  says  that  he  ought  not  to 
answer  her  on  this  writ,  because  he  does  not  hold  the  entirety  of 
the  said  land  and  messuage,  but  one  Lucy,  formerly  the  wife  of 
the  said  Hugh  de  MontesorclF,  holds  a  third  part  thereof  in 
dower.  Afterwards  Sabina  comes  and  seeks  a  licence  to  with- 
draw from  her  writ,  and  she  has  it 

62a  Geoffrv  de  Mandevill*  was  summoned  to  answer  Richard 
de  la  Dune  the  assign  of  Hugh  de  Greneford  on  a  plea  that  he 
[Geoffry]  should  observe  to  Richard  the  covenant  made  between 
the  said  Hugh  and  Robert  de  Mandevill*  the  father  of  Geoffry, 
whose  heir,  etc,  concerning  the  manor  of  Hardinton'  with  its 
appurtenances.  And  whereon  it  is  complained  that  while  the 
aforesaid  Robert  de  Mandevill*  conveyed  to  the  said  Hugh  the 
whole  of  his  manor  of  Hardinton*,  with  the  advowson  of  the 
church  of  the  same  vill  together  with  the  rents,  reliefs,  escheats, 
wardships  and  all  other  liberties,  appurtenances  and  customs  as 
well  of  villein  {rusttcisY  as  of  free  tenements  and  to  have  to  farm 
to  himself  or  his  assigns  of  the  aforesaid  Robert  and  his  heirs 
until  the  end  of  nineteen  years,  the  same  Geoffry,  contrary  to  the 
covenant,  ejected  him,  Hugh,  from  the  said  manor  with  its 
appurtenances,  wherefore  the  same  Master  Hugh,  on  account  of 
that  ejectment,  impleaded  the  same  Geoffry  before  the  justices 
of  our  lord  the  King  at  Westminster  and  claimed  against  him 
60s.  for  damages,  so  that  the  same  Geoffry  executed  to  Hugh  a 
certain  charter  which  witnesses  that  whereas  a  dispute  had  taken 
1)1  ace  between  Geoffry  of  the  one  part  and  the  said  Hugh  of 
the  other  concerning  certain  things  carried  away,  of  which  the 
estimate  is  60s.,  and  expenses  incurred,  of  which  the  estimate  is 
loos.y  on  the  occasion  of  a  certain  intrusion  {ifivasiofiis)  which 
he  Robert,  made  on  the  manor  of  Hardinton*  the  free  farm  of  the 
said  Hugh  and  that  it  was  at  last  agreed  between  them  that  the 

*  Sir  Edward  Coke  says  ( "  The  Complete  Copyholder,"  Ed.  1673.  p.  65), "  I  admit, 
and  in  a  manner  c  msent.  that  amongst  the  Normans  these  serWces  which  we  call  rural 
scr\ice^,  were  called  villain  services,  and  ihc-se  men  whom  wc  term  husl  andmen  were 
termed  villains."  **  A'w*7/V/V"  W'»uld  seem  to  have  thni  nuaning  here,  but  it  w.ll  not 
fit  in  No.  707  or  No.  716  as  used  in  conr.e^ioi  with  a  free  tencmtnL 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  I99 

said  Geoffry  should  pay  to  the  said  Hugh  60s.  for  the  things 
carried  away  and,  at  the  end  of  the  term  contained  in  the  chiro- 
graph made  between  the  said  Robert  father  of  Geoffry  and  the 
said  Hugh,  lOOf.  for  the  expenses,  or  that  he  should  extend  the 
term  of  the  said  farm  of  the  said  Hugh,  unless  Hugh  of  his  free 
will  should  be  willing  to  remit  anything  of  the  aforesaid  ;  and 
therein  he  is  injured  and  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of 
100  marks. 

And  Geoffry  comes  and  defends  the  force  and  the  injury  and 
everything,  and  fully  admits  the  chirograph  made  between  Robert 
his  father  and  the  aforesaid  Hugh,  and  his  own  charter  and 
whatever  is  contained  in  them,  but  he  says  that  in  truth  Robert 
first  demised  the  manor  to  Hugh  to  farm  for  the  term  of  ten 
years  and  within  the  term  Robert  executed  a  certain  charter  to 
Geoffry  in  which  is  contained  [a  provision]  that  Robert  should 
not  demise  to  any  one,  nor  sell  the  land  during  the  term,  and 
subsequent  to  the  making  of  the  said  charter  he  extended  the 
term  ten^  years  and  made  with  Hugh  a  chirograph  that  he  should 
have  the  said  manor  for  the  term  of  nineteen  years,  by  reason  of 
which  Geoffry  impleaded  Robert  his  father  concerning  the 
manor  before  S  de  Segrave  and  J.  de  Kaxton  upon  a  writ  of 
covenant  and  by  the  consideration  of  the  same  court  he  recovered 
his  seisin  of  the  manor,  the  said  Hugh  who  was  then  in  seisin 
not  being  vouched,  and  he  had  a  writ  to  put  him  in  seisin. 
And  that  this  is  so  he  put  himself  upon  the  rolls  of  the  aforesaid 
Stephen  and  Jeremy.  And  Richard  comes  and  says  that  in 
truth  he  Geoffry  impleaded  Robert  his  father  in  the  court  of  our 
lord  the  King  in  respect  of  the  manor  not  vouching  the  said 
Hugh  who  was  in  seisin  and  he  deceived  the  court  so  that,  by 
reason  of  such  deception,  Hugh  came  and  impleaded  Geoffry, 
with  the  result  that  he,  Geoffry,  afterwards  executed  to  him  his 
own  charter  as  is  aforesaid.  To  judgment.*  Afterwards  they 
are  agreed^  as  appears  more  fully  elsewhere  in  the  roll. 

Memb.  9. 

621.  Roger  Luvel  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with 
the  Prior  of  Breuton  on  a  plea  of  trespass  whereon  law  is  waged, 

'  Quarf^  should  not  this  be  nine  ? 
^  **  Ad  Tud'"  in  the  margin. 

3  See  "Somerset  Fines,"  p.  123,  No.  94.     I  do  not  find  the  matter  referred  to 
elsewhere  on  the  roll. 


200  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

etc,  by  pledge  of  the  Prior  himself.     And  the  agreement  is  such 
that  Roger  should  release  to  him  his  law. 

622.  Idonea  de  Westwoode  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  Michael  son  of  Reginald  de  Litlenton  on  a  plea  of 
aisize  of  mort  d'anccstor,  by  pleJge  of  Michael  himself.* 

623.  Jordan  de  Marisco.  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Harald  de  Glaston*  and  Walter  the  Frenchman, 
concerning  a  tenement  in  CusintonV  to  wit,  a  render  of  half  a 
pound  of  cumin  in  the  year,  came  and  withdrew  himself  and 
made  fine  for  himself  and  his  pledges  for  ^  mark,  by  pledge 
of  G.  Walter  of  Cusinton.' 

624.  William  the  palmer  (Palmerus\  who  brought  an  assize  of 
novel  disseisin  against  Reginald  de  Moun  concerning  a  tenement 
in  Seymonesford',  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he,  William, 
and  his  pledges,  namely  Ralph  de  Fereres  and  Robert  de 
Wyrccestr',  are  in  mercy. 

625.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  son  of 
John,  father  of  Custance,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc,  of  a 
rent  of  30^^.,  with  the  appurtenances  in  la  Fenne  on  the  day  on 
which,  etc,  and  whether,  etc,  which  rent  Adam  Ivans  holds, 
who  came  and  paid  (reddit),  the  rent  to  Custance  Therefore 
let  Custance  have  his  seisin  and  Adam  is  in  mercy  because  he 
did  not  pay  before,  by  pledge  of  Robert  de  Camera  and  Hilary 
de  Monccll. 

626.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Emisius  de 
Dunheved,  Nicholas  his  son,  Robert  Wolbold,  Geoffry  de 
Hcwcncbergh,  Osbert  Buffler  and  Richard  the  clerk  unjustly, 
etc.,  disseised  Henry  dc  Kckcwyk'  of  his  common  of  pasture 
in  Dunheved*  which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  of  Worhte, 
since  the  first  coming,  etc.  And  Ernisius  and  the  others  come 
and  allege  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain,  except 
that  they  say  that  the  aforesaid  Hugh  never  had  nor  ought  to 
have  any  common  in  the  said  pasture  and  thereon  they  put  them- 
selves upon  the  assize.     The  jurors  say  that *     Afterwards 

Henry  came  and  withdrew  himself.     Therefore  Ernisius  and  the 
others  [may  go]  without  a  day  and  Hugh  and  his  pledges  to 

'  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  I20,  No.  82. 
-  Coi>ington. 
"  Sec  No.  S2I. 

*  I)<>wnh'.*a<l. 

*  The  clerk  went  too  fast     He  had  prepared  for  ihe  finding  of  ihc  juT}*  when  the 
ca^o  broke  down. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  20I 

prosecute,  namely  Richard  de  Kareviir  and  Nicholas  de  Kin- 
merton  are  in  mercy.  [Hugh's]  pledge  for  his  amercement, 
Henry  de  Ekerwyk*. 

627.  The  jury  of  twenty-four  to  convict  twelve^  come  to 
recognise  by  Henry  de  Estaweir,  Hugh  Fich,'  William  de 
Aston,  Adam  de  Aston,  William  Fichet,  John  de  Chamflur, 
William  de  Tylly,  William  le  Bret,  Robert  de  Burton,  Geoffry 
de  Wolmereston',  Robert  de  Coker,  Ralph  de  Gyverny,  Adam  de 
Portbyr*,  Theoric  de  Burnham,  William  Everard,  Thomas  de 
Kael,  Reginald  de  Sapewyk/  John  de  Copenor,'  Thomas  de 
Cruk,'  Ralph  Fitz  Urse.  Thomas  Therry,  Ralph  de  Meriet,  John 
de  Bonevill,  whether  Henry  de  Gant  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised 
Jordan  de  Alkesey  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Hammes  which 
appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  Alkeseye,  since  the  first 
crossing,  etc,  and  whereon  the  same  Henry  complains  that  the 
jurors  of  novel  disseisin  swore  falsely  (falsuni  fecerunt  sacra- 
mefttum)y  who  [the  twenty-four]  say  upon  their  oath  that 
Henry  did  unjustly,  etc.,  disseise  Jordan  of  the  said  common  of 
pasture,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Jordan 
[may  go]  without  a  day.     And  Henry  is  in  mercy.* 

628.  Thomas  de  Legh,  the  chaplain,  gives  ^  mark  for  a 
licence  to  agree  with  Geoffry  de  Lawerton  and  Amabel  his  wife 
on  a  plea  of  six  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Ehforton, 
and  the  agreement  is  such  that  the  aforesaid  Geoffry  admits  that 
the  said  six  acres  with  the  appurtenances,  are  the  right  of  the 
chapel  of  Ehsforton  and  gives  them  up  to  him  [Thomas]  in 
right  of  the  said  chapel,  quit  of  him  ahd  his  heirs  for  ever. 
Thomas  de  Legh's  pledge  for  the  \  mark,  Geoffry  de  Lawerton'. 

629.  Helewis,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  de  Mandevill' 
gives  I  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with  Geoffry  de  Mandevill. 
And  the  agreement  is  such  that * 

630.  The  Abbot  of  Keynesham  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  John  de  Thoreny  on  a  plea  of  land.* 

631.  William  de  Barry,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of 
charter  against  the  Abbot  of  Neth  concerning  one  messuage 
and  one  virgate  and  a  half  and  seventy-four  acres  of  land  and 

^  For  the  finding  of  the  twelve,  see  No.  487. 

«  Over  **  Henry  "  is  written  **  alibi ,'  and  the  name  is  run  through,  as  is  also  the 
•*  mia  "  in  the  margin. 

'  The  entry  ends  abruptly  thus.     I  do  not  find  any  mention  of  this  in  "  Somerset 
Fines." 

*  See  "Somerset  Fines,"  p.  113,  No.  52. 

2   D 


2o2r  ^So^^rERsrrsmRE  pleas. 

five  acres  and  a  half  of  meadow  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Horblaweton'*  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute  are  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for  los,  by  pledge 
of  Thomas  de  Marifeco. 

632.  William  the  cook*  (Cocus)  seeks  against  Richard  de 
Draykote  one  ferling  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Dray- 
ton* as  his  right,  etc.,  and  in  which  he  [Richard]  has  no  entry 
unless  by  William  de  Draykot',  to  whom  the  aforesaid  William 
demised  it  for  a  term,  etc.  And  Richard  comes  and  says  that  he 
does  not  hold  that  land  because  one  John,  brother  of  Richard, 
holds  it  as  of  the  feoffment  of  William  de  Draycote  his  father, 
and  William  cannot  deny  this.  Therefore  Richard  [may  go} 
without  a  day  and  William  is  in  mercy  by  pledge  of  William 
de  Albyniaco  of  Ivelcestr'  and  Gerard  de  Fraxino  of  Coker. 
•  633.  Richard  Thurlok'  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Robert  de  Tintcnhull'*  on  a  plea  of  land  by  pledge  of 
Nicholas  son  of  Robert  de  Pyrreton'  and  John  de  Valletorto. 

634.  The  Prioress  of  Bocland  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  the  Prioress  of  Kington'  on  a  plea  of  debt  by  pledge 
of  Robert  de  Shorham.  And  the  agreement  is  such  that  thq 
Prk)ress  of  Bocland'  admits  that  she  owes  i/j.  of  annual  rent  to 
the  Prioress  of  Kington,  whereof  half  is  payable  at  Michaelmas 
and  the  other  half  at  Easter.  » 

635.  Roger  de  Whittokesmede  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  Thomas  de  la  Lude  and  Amice  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of 
covenant,  etc.,  by  pledge  of  William  c}e  Langeford'.*  i 

636.  The  Prior  of  Dunstorr'  gives'^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree*  with  Ralph  de  Sandhull'  on  a  plea  of  land  by  pledge  of 
Geoffry  de  Kctenour.^ 

637.  Ralph  Russel  puts  in  his  place  Nicholas  Russell| 
against  (William  Scissor  struck  out)  the  same  William  on 
the  same.^ 

638.  Isabella  wife  of  Ralph  Russel  puts  in  her  place  Joh« 
le  Franceis  or  William  Scissor  against  William  de  Caj^ella,  on 
a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter,  etc.  t  • 

•  '  >  . « • 

'  Homblolton. 

'  Between  this  and  the  preceding  entry  occurs  the  nadie,   "  Emoldus'Hifae," 
without  more  ;  no  doubt  the  beginning  of  an  abandohetl  entry.  '  '        - 

»  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  118,  No.  71.     The  land  was  in  **  Tyntenhull."  * 

*  See  '*  Somerset  Fines,  *  p.  116,  No.  63. 

*  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  122,  No.  8S.     The  land  was  in  Dovery,  Porlock.  I 

*  Kitnor  or  Culbone.  ^  Perhaps  this  entry  ought  to  havefollow^fl  Iht  flext. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  203 

639.  Dyonisia  de  Frome  puts  in  her  place  Roger  de  Radene 
against  James  de  Fxome  and  Cecily  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of  land, 
etc. 

640.  William  Dolling'  puts  in  his  place  Simon  Warner  against 
Amice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Humphrey  Michel,  on  a  plea  of 
dower,  etc. 

641.  Juliana  wife  of  Henry  de  Bydefaud'  puts  in  her  place 
Henry  against   Henry  de  Cheselade  and  others,  on  a  writ  of 

iwauanty  of  charter,  etc 

642.  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Legh*,  puts 
•in  her  place  Maurice  her  son  against  Peter  Emcwy,  on  a  plea 
of  dawqr,  etc.. 

Memb.  9^ 

643.  Thomas  the  clerk  of  Raden',  Adam  de  Radene,  John 
<jrautnbiki  of  FroiYi^,  John  Sine,  Henry  Hode  of  Frome,  John 
Crig',  Walter  Cosin ^ 

644.  Walter  de  Foklande  and  Agnes  de  Foukland  were 
attached- to  answer  Henry  de  Summis  on  a  plea  why,  by  force 
and  arms,  after  summons  before  the  justices  in  eyre,  they  ejected 
him,  Henry,  from  the  custody  of  the  lands  and  heir  of  one 
Walter  de  Fouklande  in  Fouklande,  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  while  Agnes  demised  to  the  same  Henry  the 
whol^  of  the  land  which  she  had  in  the  vill  of  Fouklande 
with  the  aforesaid  David  her  son,  to  wit,  one  carucate  of 
land,  with  the  appurtenances,  until  the  full  age  {usque  ad 
iegitimavi  etatem)  of  David  by  her  charter,  which  he  proffers 
and  which  testifies  this,  the  same  Walter  and  Agnes  ejected 
him  as  is  aforesaid,  and  by  that  grant  he  was  in  seisin  of 
the  land  for  three  years  after  the  making  of  the  charter  until 
they  ejected  him,  and  that  the  charter  was  read  in  full  county 
[court]  in  the  time  of  Jordan  Oliver,  then  sheriff,  he  puts 
nimsfelf  upon  the  record  of  the  county  [court] ;  and  that  by 
the  said  grant  of  the  aforesaid  Agnes  and  the  making  of  her 
charter,  he  was  in  full  seisin  of  the  said  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, for  three  years  after  the  making  [of  the  charter],  he 
puts  himself  upon  the  country  and  upon  the  witnesses  named  in 
the  charter.  And  Walter  and  Agnes  come,  and  Agnes  defends 
the  force  and  injury  and  everything,  etc.     And  she  fully  defends 


^  This  is  an  incomplete  entry. 


that  never  by  her  diaxter  vas  that  [grant]  made  nor  with  her 
assent,  and  that  such  was  so,  she  puts  herself  opoo  the  record  of 
the  county  [court].  Afterwards  they  are  agreed  fay  licence; 
and  the  agreement  is  such  that  Henry  shall  rdease  to  Agnes  all 
the  right  and  claim  wiiich  he  had  in  the  said  custody  saving  to 
Henrv  his  chattels,  whether  of  crops  or  animals  as  of  odier 
things,  and  Agnes  may  have  her  seisin. 

645.  Morice  de  Legh'  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  with 
Amice,  formerly  the  wite  of  Hu^  de  la  Bye;  on  a  plea  of  land 
by  pledge  of  Thomas  Trevet.* 

646.  William  Branche  gi\^es  I  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  James  Pav-n  and  Cecily  his  wife.  00  a  plea  of  landL  etc,  hf 
pted^  of  Richard  de  Wrotham.* 

647.  D\x>aisia  dai^ter  of  Richer'  gives  J  mark  [for  a 
licence  to  agree]  with  James  Fitz  Pa^-n  \/iI  PagiMmi}  and 
Cecily  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter,  by  pledge 
of  R  :«^Ter  de  Radeae.* 

6^±  William  PsXtebcef  gives  I  mirk  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  James  son  of  WIHLim  on  a  puea  of  land,  by  pfeK%e  of 
WillLim  Branch.* 

64:^  Alice,  formerly  the  wire  of  Thomas  GuLe;  seds  against 
John  Haaekere  ooe-third  part  of  twent>--three  acres  of  land. 
with  the  aoDurtenances^  in  S:ok\  as  hicr  dower,  etc  And 
Jocn  ccm±s  and  allei:es  r»xh:n^  whereior  she  ott^t  not  to 
LiT^  ber  do-arer  tbereirL  Tber^foce  it  is  coosiocred  that  Alice 
sii'itild  recover  her  seisin,  an-i  John  is  in  merc>-  by  pwedige  of 
\\T',:,im  de  La:iibrDk\  Afterjrards  :t  is  shown  ckariy  that  the 
iaid  'z<:rL  ^d  n^x  hv.«Id  thit  lini.  bet  that  ocse  Chrisdaiuu 
fimterlv  the  wife  of  Richard  de  StokeSw  "beld  it"*  Therefore  it  is 
cicsidered  triat  Alice  sbxild  take  rwching  by  that  writ  arxi  that 
soe  zi::^t  croceed  i^^i:^-  ChristiiiLi  if  she  wisfced. 

z^z.  G^^Erv  d'i  Marde-.ill'  c-v^:^  10  r^irks  f >-r  a  ISceaoe  to 
a^r^e  iritjt  Gerrrrde  Bridercct  oc  a  rCea  s?c  coveiiar-t,  bvptet^e 
cc  Will-arT  de  Wydew^ccth*  ar.d  R:bert  de  BCakeinrd'. 

t-:.  N.chci-Ls  >:a   cf   K.-c^"-  i:>i    Matthew  de   CiiveadoQ* 


-  -  >.incr-ec  Fjics^"  r>  1 17.  N..  :»i.     T^  iKii£  «»>  x  Fr.im£-    f-'«&r  ^rait  jf 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  205 

were  summoned  to  answer  Matthew  de  Columbariisand  Matilda 
his  wife,  on  a  plea  by  what  right  they  claimed  common  in  the 
land  of  Matthew  and  Matilda  in  Wrokishal',  inasmuch  as 
Matthew  and  Matilda  have  no  common  in  the  land  of  Nicholas 
and  Matthew,  nor  do  Nicholas  and  Matthew  service  to  them  for 
which  they  [Nicholas  and  Matthew]  ought  to  have  common  in 
their  land.  And  Nicholas  does  not  come,  etc.  Therefore  let 
him  be  attached  against  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into 
the  county  of  Dorset  And  Matthew  comes  and  craves  a  view. 
Let  him  have  it.  The  same  day  is  given  them,  and  let  the  writ 
remain  with  the  sheriff. 

652.  The  Prior  of  Staverdal'  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  Roger  Tyrel  and  Sara  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  warranty 
of  charter  by  pledge  of  Richard  Luvel.^ 

653.  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  John  Brien,  gives  ^  mark 
for  a  licence  to  agree  with  Lucy  de  Montcacuto  on  a  plea  of 
dower,  by  pledge  of  Ralph  de  Ferrers.  And  the  agreement  is 
such  that  Alice  sought  against  Lucy  a  third  part  of  five  acres 
of  land  and  gave  up  to  her  the  said  third  part,  and  Lucy  is 
satisfied  {tenet  se  contentam). 

654.  William  son  of  Robert  de  Insula  gives  i  mark  for  a 
licence  to  agree  with  Stephen  de  Ferrers  and  Sara  his  wife, 
Robert  de  Baggedreppe  and  Sybil  his  wife,  on  a  plea  of  land, 
by  pledge  of  Robert  de  Baggedripe.* 

655.  William  son  of  Andrew  de  Cume,  gives  i  mark  for  a 
licence  to  agree  with  the  aforesaid  Stephen  and  Sara  by  pledge 
of  Roger  de  Barkenoles  and  Roger  de  Baggedripe.* 

656.  Cecily,  formerly  the  wife  of  John  de  la  Stane,  seeks 
against  John  de  Henl*  a  third  part  of  forty  acres  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances  in  La  Stane,  and  against  Thomas  de  Marisco, 
a  third  part  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
the  same  vill,  as  her  dower,  etc.  And  John  and  Thomas  come 
and  say  that  she  ought  not  to  have  dower  because  the  said 
John  was  not,  on  the  day  on  which  he  married  her,  or  ever 
afterwards,  seised  of  the  said  land  so  as  to  be  able  to  dower  her 
therefrom,  and  thereon  they  put  themselves  upon  the  country. 
Therefore  let  there  be  a  jury  thereon :  Who  say  upon  their 
oaths  that  the  said  John  did  not  hold  on  the  day  on  which  he 

*  *' Somerset  Fines,"  p.  114,  No.  58,  for  two  virgates  of  land  in  "Saldcford." 
'  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  1 16,  No.  64,  for  a  third  part  of  a  hide  of  land  in  •'Brocton." 
'  •*  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  114,  No.  57,  presumaDly  relates  to  this. 


206  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


married  Cecily,  nor . ever  af icruards,  held  more  than  thirteen 
acres  o£  land,  which  the  said  John  de  la  Stane  holds.  TherefiDre 
it  is  considered  that  of  the  same  thirteen  acres  of  land  she 
should  recover  her. seisin  of  a  third  part.  And  because  it  is 
testified  that  John  often  offered  her  the  said  third  part,  let  hisa 
go  quit  and  Thomas  de  Marisco  likewise. 

657.  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of  Ralph  Hamard*,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  dower  against  John  son  of  Ralph,  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
WaltenFrankelajn  of  Dereberg**  and  John  Marshall  (Afarisca/ius) 
of  the  same,  are  in  mercy. 

4  658.  A  vice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Cruk,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  dower  against  Nicholas  Beynin  and  Dyonisia 
his  wife,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely  Nicholas  de  Cruk*  and  Ralph  the  French- 
man, are  in  mercy. 

659.  Alice  de  Rodmerton,  who  brought  a  writ  of  covenant 
against  Walter  de  Loderford  concerning  five  ferlings  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Fodindon*,*  does  not  proceed.  There- 
fore she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  namely 
■            She  did  not  find  pledges,  therefore  nothing.* 

660.  Joan,  formerly  the  wife  of  Richard  de  Clavemere,  wbO 
brought  a  writ  of  entry  against  the  Abbot  of  Flexleg*  concern- 
ing one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Ragelbyre, 
does  not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely  William  le  Theyn*  and  Simon  Billok,  are  in  mercy. 

661.  Hawise,  formerly  thd  wife  of  Richard  le  Tessun,  soeVs 
against  Stephen  Tessun  a  third  part  of  half  a  viigate  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Pcryton,  as  her  dower,  etc.  And 
3tephen  comes  and  by  licence  gives  up  to  her  the  said  third 
part.     Therefore  let  her  have  her  seisin. 

662.  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Walter  Pakok',  who  brought 
a  writ  of  dower  against  Walter  son  of  Walter  and  others,  docs 
not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely  Robert  Paukok*  and  Walter  de  Camera,  are  in  mercy. 

'  Durborough. 

'  Fodington  in  Babcary. 

*  The  clerk  had  prepared  to  write  the  names  of  the  pledges  as  usual,  when  he 
f  >und  that  Alice  had  not  found  any,  and  he  so  states.  But  it  seems  that  Alice  herself 
was  not  amerced. 

*  Subse<]uent  to  the  making  of  the  entry  it  was  found  that  William  le  Theyu  was 
dead,  and  the  word  "  odii/ "  was  ^iritten  avejr  his  name.  -      * 


•  SOMERSETSHIRE'  PLEAS.  207" 

n'  663.  Nicholas  de  Bosco  and  Emma  his  wife,  who  brought  a 
writ  of  warranty  of  charter  against  Adam  son  of  Jordan  con- 
cerning half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Cusinton*,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  they  and  their  pledge 
to  prosecute,  namely  Hugh  Kotyn  de  YvelctstrV  are  in  mercy.  ; 

664.  Cecily,  daughter  of  William,  and  Joan  ber  sister,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of  charter  against  Henry  Blund 
concerning  three  ferlings  and  five  acres  of  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  Schislode,  do  not  proceed.  Therefore  they  and 
their  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Humphrey  Prat  and  John 
Whytlok*,  are  in  mercy.  .    , 

»      ■ 

Meinb,  10. 
l> 

665.  Henry  de  Kareviir,  Robert  Malherbc,  Robert  d^ 
Whatelegh',  and  Adam  Gyaine,  the  four  knights  sent  to  Flint- 
fond  to  see  whether  the  infirn^ity  for  ^hich  Richard  de  Cumbe 
essoined  himself  de  malo  lectin  against  Hugh  Pevercl  and  Isa- 
bella his  wife  on  a  plea  of  advowson  t)e  bed -sickness,  come  and 
say  that  they  saw  him  on  Supday  next  after  the  Feast  of  St. 
Hilary,  and  that  he  was  ill  in  bed,  aqd  they  gave  him  a  <|Jay 
at  the  Tower  of  London  in  one  year  and  one  day  from  the  day 
f)f  their  view.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Lucy  Malet,  a  copar- 
cener (particip^Y  ^f  Helar',  wifq  of  Richard  de  Cumb*. 

»  6>^,  Amice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Humphrey,  Michel,  seeks 
Against  Reginald  son  of  Humphrey  a .^hird  part  of  two  virgates 
of  land  with  the  appurtenance^  in  ;  Merilinoe,,  and  against; 
Nicholas  son  of  Humphrey  a  third  part  of  two  virgates  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same  vjll,  and  against  Heniy  de 
StawcU  a  third  part  of  one  virgate  of  lapd  with  the  appurtenances 
in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Walter  de  la  Forde  a  third  part  of 
five  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same  vill,  and 
against  Humphrey  dc  Stane  and  Juliafjiis  mother  a  third  part  of 
half  a  virgate  of  land  in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Walter  1^ 
Ci^yz  and  Agnes  his  wife  a  third  ^art  of  four  acres  of  land  with 
%he  appurtenances  in  the  same  vill,  an^  against  Agnes  de  Suttop 
^5  third  part  of  four  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  the 
^Oie  vill,  and  against  Walter  son  of  Mariot  a  third  part  of  "ha(f 

*  After  Hugh's  name  occurs  "tin,"  as  if  something  more  should  have  been  written 
which  was  omitted.  •  •     •  **  -^ 

^  See  Bract.,  fns.  JlRkand  370t>.       a«..    h        «<  • 


2o8  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

an  acre  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same  vill,  and 
against  Nicholas  de  Caldekot'  a  third  part  of  one  acre  of  meadow 
with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Eva,  for- 
merly the  wife  of  Raymond,  a  third  part  of  two  acres  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances  in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Walter  son  of 
Humphrey  the  chaplain  a  third  part  of  hve  acres  of  land  and 
one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Melebum*,  and  against 
William  Dolling*'  a  third  part  of  twenty-eight  acres  of  land  and 
two  acres  of  meadow  with  the  appurtenances  in  Melebum,  and 
against  Henry  de  la  Fenne*  a  third  part  of  one  \irgale  of  land, 
except  seven  acres  of  land  and  tsio  acres  of  meadow  with  the 
appurtenances  in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Richard  Mauniel  a 
third  part  of  one  acre  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same 
\'ill,  and  against  Walter  PatewjTi  a  third  part  of  tuo  acres  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same  \ill.  and  against  Richard 
Alny  a  third  part  of  three  acres  of  land  and  two  acres  of  meadow 
with  the  appurtenances  in  the  same  \i\\,  and  against  Thomas  the 
Mercer  (/f  Mercer)  a  third  part  of  8j.  of  rent  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  the  same  vill.  as  her  dower,  etc  And  Ranald 
and  all  the  others  come.  And  William  Dolling,  as  to  the  ten  acres 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Melebum*,  vouches  to  warranty 
Henry  de  la  Fenne  who  is  present  and  warrants  him,  and  Thomas 
the  Mercer  vouches  to  warranty  Roger  le  Porter  who  is  present 
and  warrants  him,  and  Henr>'  de  la  Fenne,  as  well  as  to  the  land 
which  he  holds  as  to  that  which  he  warrants,  renders  to  her  her 
said  third  part  Therefore  let  William  Dolling  have  of  the  land 
of  Henry  to  the  value  of  the  ten  acres  which  [the  latter] 
warranted,  and  Roger  le  Porter  gives  up  to  her  her  third  part  of 
Ss.  rent,  and  let  Thomas  the  Mercer  have  of  the  land  of 
Roger  to  the  value,  etc  And  Reginald  and  all  the  others 
come  and  by  licence  give  up  to  her  her  said  third  parts  as  her 
dower,  etc.  Therefore  let  her  have  her  seisin,  and  Humphrey 
and  all  the  others  are  in  mercy  because  they  did  not  give  up 
before. 

667.  Henry  Malherbe,  who  brought  a  writ  of  entr>'  against 
Blissotta  daughter  of  Alexander  de  Mudesl*  touching  half  a 
virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Wedmol*,  does 
not  proceed.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely  Walter  de  Litleton*,  Robert  de  Litleton*,  and  Rcbert  de 
Cunteviir,  are  in  merc>'. 

'  There  is  a  small  cross  over  these 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  209 

668.  Nicholas  A  vend  was  attached  to  answer  Matthew  de 
Furneaus  on  a  plea  why  he  made  waste,  sale,  and  ruin  {vastunt 
vendicioneniy  et  exiHuni)  of  the  lands,  woods,  houses  and  men  he 
had  in  custody  of  the  inheritance  of  the  said  Matthew  in  Kylve 
to  the  disinheriting  of  the  said  Matthew,  contrary  to  the 
prohibition,  etc.^  And  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  sold  a 
certain  wood  which  is  called  Halewaye  to  one  Thomas  de 
Haleway,  who,  at  one  time,  used  to  claim  a  right  in  the  said 
wood ;  and,  further,  in  another  wood,  which  is  called  Kelve,  he 
threw  down  about  two  hundred  oaks,  and  he  threw  down  a 
certain  stable  and  a  bakehouse  (stabuliim  et  unum  furnuin)  and 
the  gates  of  his  court,  and  he  laid  waste  {devastavit)  to  the 
disinheritance,  etc.,  whereby  he  [Matthew]  is  injured  and  has 
[suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of  40  marks,  and  thereof  he 
produces  suit.  And  Nicholas  comes  and  defends  the  force  and 
injury,  and  says  that  he  made  no  waste  of  the  lands,  woods, 
houses,  etc..  and  says  positively  that  he  has  sold  no  wood  to  the 
said  Thomas.  Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  Nicholas  gives 
2  marks  for  a  licence  to  make  a  concord  by  pledge  of  William 
Maubanc.  And  the  agreement  is  such  that  the  aforesaid 
Nicholas  gives  up  to  Matthew  the  whole  of  the  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  which  he  had  in  custody  as  of  the  fee  of  the  said 
Matthew,  and  Matthew  gives  Nicholas  20  marks,  and  he  puts 
himself  gratuitously  {gratis)  in  the  custody  of  William  Maubanc 
who  has  admitted  him  {qui  euin  admisit). 

66g,  Master  John  Bakun  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  Richard  le  Bigod  on  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter, 
by  pledge  of  Richard  himself* 

670.  Ralph  Trevet  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Ralph  Hese  on  a  plea  of  covenant,  by  pledge  of  Ralph 
himself.* 

671.  James  Wace,  who  brought  a  writ  quo  jure,  etc.,  against 
Alexander  de  Monteforti,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy.  He  is  a  pauper  and 
has  no  pledge.     Therefore  nothing. 

672.  Richard  de   Gurnay,    by   his    attorney,   seeks   against 

*  This  means  **  contra prohibitionem  domini  Regis.  ^^  It  would  seem  that  the  King's 
Court  could  rot  interfere  to  stay  waste  until  the  tenant  had  received  the  King's  pro- 
hibition through  the  sheriff.     Sec  Bract.,  fo's.  315  and  315b. 

'  **  Somerset  Fines,''  p.  116,  No.  65,  relating  to  land  m  Merston. 

•  "Somerset  Fines,"  p.  112,  No.  48.  Kalph  Huse's  wii'c,  Eva,  was  a  party.  Jt 
related  to  lands  in  **  Crjnd<>n  and  Akenton." 

2    E 


2IO  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Stephen  de  Auston'the  mill  of  Bosecroft  and  one  virgate  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Caninten'  except  five  acres  of  meadow, 
whereof  William  son  of  Philip,  kinsman  of  the  aforesaid  Richard, 
whose  heir,  etc.,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc.,  on  the  day  on 
which,  etc.  And  Stephen  comes  and  says  that  he  claims 
nothing  in  the  aforesaid  mill  and  land  except  for  a  term  under 
one  Isabella  de  Portesheved.  And  Richard  cannot  contradict 
this.  Therefore  Stephen  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Richard 
is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.     Let  him  be  in  custody.^ 

673.  Roger  de  Berkel  and  Henry  de  Campo  Florido  were 
summoned  to  answer  Robert  de  Columbariis  on  a  plea  by  what 
right  they  claimed  common  in  the  land  of  Robert  in  Lanyete." 
inasmuch  as  Robert  has  no  common  in  the  lands  of  Robert  and 
Henry,  nor  do  Robert  and  Henry  service  to  him  wherefor  they 
ought  to  have  common  in  his  land.  And  Roger  comes  and  says 
that  he  ought  not  to  answer  him  on  this  writ,  because  he  holds 
nothing  except  in  the  name  of  dower  with  .  .  *  his  wife, 
mother  of  Henry,  and  he  says  that  Henry  is  under  age. 
Therefore  a  day  is  given  to  them  on  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices  into  Dorset.  And  Roger  mainprised  to  have  Henry, 
and  be  it  known  that  the  writ  remains  in  the  meanwhile  with  the 
sheriff. 

674.  Richard  de  Halewell*  seeks  against  William  son  of 
Richard  ten  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Yvelcestr' 
as  his  right,  etc.,  and  in  which  he  [William]  has  no  entry  except  by 
Richard  son  of  Matilda,  to  whom  Jordan  de  Halewell*,  father  of 
Richard,  whose  heir,  etc.,  demised  them  for  a  term,  etc.  And 
William  comes  and  defends  his  right  and  such  entry,  etc.,  and  says 
that  he  has  entry  in  the  land  by  Richard  himself,  who  granted  that 
land  to  him  and  quitclaimed  for  himself  and  his  heirs  by  his 
charter,  which  he  [William]  proffers,  and  which  testifies  this. 
And  Richard  comes  and  says  that  the  charter  ought  not  to  hurt 
him  because  it  was  never  made  with  his  assent,  and  that  such 
was  so  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country  and  the  witnesses  named 
in  the  charter.  And  upon  this  come  the  bailiffs  of  Yvelcester 
and  say  that  they  ought  not  to  answer*  beyond  the  walls  of  the 

'  In  the  margin.  '  Laymatt. 

^  The  name  is  not  filled  in  upon  the  roll. 

*  The  clerk  writes  as  though  the  bailiffs  were  parties  to  the  artion.  Of  course  they 
^cre  not,  but  they  intervened  and  craved  cc^nizance  of  the  rii  his  of  their  burgh. 
Probably  the  question  of  juri  diction  could  not  have  been  raised  by  way  of  plea. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  211 


burgh  of  Ivelcester  according  to  the  charter  of  our  lord  the  King, 
which  they  proffer,  and  which  testifies  this.  Afterwards  come 
twelve  jurors  and  the  witnesses  named  in  the  charter,  who  say 
upon  their  oaths  that  the  aforesaid  Richard  made  that  charter  to 
the  aforesaid  William.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William 
[may  go]  without  a  day,  and  that  Richard  should  take  nothing 
by  that  jury,  and  should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.  He  is  a 
pauper. 

675.  The  Prior  of  Dunstor*  confesses  that  he  is  bound  to 
pay  Ralph  de  Sandhull  10  marks,  of  which  he  should  pay  him 
5  marks  at  mid  lent  in  the  27th  year  of  the  King's  reign,  and  at 
the  nativity  of  St.  John  the  Baptist,  5  marks.  And  if  he  do 
not,  he  grants,  etc.^ 

6y6,  Emma,  formerly  the  wife  of  Walter  the  reeve,  puts  in 
her  place  William  son  of  William  against  Robert  son  of 
Hodierne,  on  a  plea  of  land. 

6yy.  Peter  de  Marisco  puts  in  his  place  Thomas  de  Marisco 
his  son  against  Mabel  Kny  te,  on  a  plea  of  land,  etc. 

Memb,  \od, 

678.  William  Fukeram  offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Godcfrey  de  Aunho  on  a  plea  that  he  [Godfrey]  should 
permit  him  to  have  the  common  of  pasture  in  Godfrey's  wood  in 
Heywode  which  he  ought  to  have,  etc.  And  Godfrey  does  not 
come,  etc.,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  And  it  is  adjudged  that 
he  be  attached  to  be  at  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into  the 
county  of  Dorset,  etc.,  and  let  the  writ  remain  with  the  sheriff. 

679.  Margery  de  Flury  seeks  against  Robert  de  Langeford 
ten  acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Langeford'  as 
her  right  and  marriage  portion,  and  in  which  he  has  no  entry 
unless  by  William  de  Langeford',  to  whom  William  dc  Budevill*, 
formerly  Margery's  husband,  demised  them  and  whom  [the 
latter]  in  the  lifetime  she,  etc'  And  Robert  comes  and  defends 
her  right,  etc.,  and  says  that  he  ought  not  to  answer  her  on  this 
writ  because  he  does  not  hold  the  entirety  of  the  said  ten  acres 
of  land,  for  Matilda,  Robert's  mother,  holds  a  third  part  thereof 
in  dower,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country,  and 
Margery  does  likewise.     Therefore  let  a  jury  be  made,  who  say 

*  A  power  of  distress  would  follow. 

*  The  full  phrase  is  **  cut  ipsa  in  tita  sua  contradicot  non  potuit,^*     See  note  to 
No  615. 


212  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS, 

s 

upon  their  oaths  that  the  aforesaid  Robert  holds  the  entirety  of 
the  said  ten  acres  with  the  appurtenances.  Therefore  it  is  con- 
sidered that  Margery  should  recover  her  seisin  of  the  said  land, 
and  Robert  is  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of  Richard  de  la  Bere.* 

680.  Roger  de  la  Lude  and  Idonea  his  wife,  and  Amice,  sister 
of  the  said  Idonea,  seek  against  Ralph  de  Gridlekote  nine  acres  of 
land  and  one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Hittokesmede, 
in  which  the  same  Ralph  has  no  entr}'  unless  by  Nicholas  son 
of  Galienus,  to  whom  Isolda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Ranulph  Ger- 
nun,  who  held  them  in  dower  as  of  the  gift  of  the  same  BLanulph, 
formerly  her  husband,  and  father  of  the  aforesaid  Idonea  and 
Amice,  whose  heirs,  etc.  [demised  them].  And  Ralph  comes  and 
says  that  he  ought  not  to  answer  them  on  this  writ  [because] 
Amice  has  a  husband,  Thomas  by  name,  and  he  [Ralph]  craves 
judgment  whether  he  ought  to  answer  when  Thomas  is  not 
named  in  the  writ  And  Roger  and  the  others  admit  this. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Ralph  [may  go]  without  a  day, 
and  Amice  is  in  mercy.* 

681.  Ralph  Trevet  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Helewise  daughter  of  John  Ryer  on  a  plea  of  covenant, 
etc.,  by  pledge  of  Thomas  Trevet.* 

682.  Nicholas  son  of  Robert  offers  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Ralph  de  Evesham  on  a  plea  why  he  [Ralph]  claims 
common  in  the  land  of  Nicholas  in  Buksede,  inasmuch  as 
Nicholas  has  no  common  in  the  land  of  Ralph,  nor  does  he  [any] 
service  to  him  [Ralph]  for  which  he  ought  to  have  common 
in  his  land.  Afterwards  Nicholas  comes  and  says  that  the 
aforesaid  Ralph  is  a  villein,  and  he  [Nicholas]  will  not  sue 
against  him.  Therefore  Nicholas  is  in  mercy,  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute  likewise,  namely  Robert  de  Columbariis  and 
Richard  Maviel. 

683.  Gilbert  Grafenloyl,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of 
charter  against  Walter  de  Halton  concerning  two  virgates  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Heynstrugge,  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Colin  Michel* 
and  Richard  Durant,  are  in  mercy. 

*  In  the  margin  is  c u stadia tur  in  its  abbreviated  form  **c^." 

^  Observe  that  all  the  plaintiffs  are  not  amerced  for  their  error  in  commencing  an 

action  without  joining  all  necessary  parties.     Presumably  it  was  thought  that  Amice 

as  alone  in  default  for  not  reminding  her  co-plaintiffs  that  she  had  a  hu:>l>and  living. 

*  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  112,  No   51. 

*  "  Alibi  "  is  written  over  this  name. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  213 

684.  The  same  Gilbert,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of 
charter  against  Ralph  le  Bret  and  Christiana  his  wife  touching 
two  messuages  with  the  appurtenances  in  Muleburn,  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
Nicholas  son  of  Michael  and  Humphrey  Mikel,  are  in  mercy. 
Afterwards  Gilbert  comes.     Therefore  his  pledges  are  quit 

685.  The  same  Gilbert,^  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of 
charter  against  Walter  son  of  Jordan  concerning  one  virgate  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Henstrig',  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  the  aforesaid 
Colin  and  Richard  Durant,  are  in  mercy. 

686.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  de  BodevilF,  was 
attached  to  answer  Jordan  de  Harpeford  on  a  plea  why  she 
made  waste,  sale,  and  ruin  of  the  lands,  houses,  gardens,  and 
woods  which  she  holds  in  dower  of  the  inheritance  of  the  said 
Jordan  in  Langeford,  to  the  disinheriting  of  Jordan  contrary  to 
the  prohibition,  etc.,*  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  the 
aforesaid  Margery  threw  down  thirty  oaks  and  daily  commits 
waste,  whereby  he  is  injured  and  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the 
value  of  looj.,  and  thereof  he  produces  suit.  And  Margery  comes 
and  defends  the  force  and  injury,  etc.,  and  positively  defends 
that  she  caused  any  waste  to  the  said  lands,  houses,  etc.,  and 
says  that  the  truth  is  that  she  threw  down  about  fifteen  young 
trees'  {blettrones)  of  which  Jordan  carried  away  ten,  and  the  five 
which  remained  to  her  she  used  in  the  repair  {sustentcuionem) 
of  the  houses,  and  she  has  committed  no  other  waste.  She  puts 
herself  upon  the  country,  and  Jordan  does  likewise.  Therefore 
let  a  jury  be  made,  and  let  it  come  on  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices  in  the  county  of  Dorset.  The  sheriff  is  notified;  and 
Randal  de  Flury  and  John  Cape,  the  first  pledges  of  Margery, 
are  in  mercy. 

Afterwards  come  twelve  jurors  at  Schyreburn,  in  the  county 
of  Dorset,  and  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  aforesaid  Margery 
threw  down  thirty  oaks  in  the  said  wood  and  committed 
waste  in  the  same  wood  to  the  value  of  10^.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  for  the  future  she  should  commit  no  waste  in 
the  said  wood,  sale,  or  ruin,  etc.,  and  that  she  be  in  mercy  for 


*  **  Alibi"  is  written  over  this  name. 

*  See  ante^  note  to  No.  668. 

*  **  BUtonata  siiva  twveilis  arboril»usJ*^     Ducange,  **  Gloss." 


214  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

her   transgression,  by  pledge  of  the  sherifT.      Let  her  be  in 
custody.^ 

687.  Peter  de  Bere,  who  brought  a  writ  against  Robert  de 
Esten*  touching  the  taking  of  homage  and  reliefs  in  respect  of 
the  free  tenement  which  he  holds  of  him  in  Edewston,  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
John  Marshall,'  of  Demeberg',  and  William  son  of  Hugh,  are  in 
mercy. 

688.  Elyas  son  of  Richard  seeks  against  Matthew  de  Clive- 
don',  whom  William  de  Clivedon'  vouched  to  warranty,  and  who 
warrants  him,  one  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Hemmegrave  as  his  right,  etc,  and  whereof  Richard  father  of 
Elyas  was  seised  as  of  fee  and  in  right  in  the  time  of  King  John, 
taking  therefrom  profits  to  the  value  of  ^  mark.  And  from  him 
[Richard]  the  right  in  the  land  descended  to  this  Elyas  as  son 
and  heir.  And  that  such  is  his  right,  etc.,  he  offers,  etc.  And 
Matthevvr  comes  and  defends  his  right  now  and  otherwise,  etc,  and 
says  that  he  ought  not  to  answer  him  on  this  writ  because  the 
aforesaid  Richard,  his  father,  under  whose  seisin  he  claims,  was  a 
thief,  and  notably  of  three  stolen  hogs  {baconibus)  in  the  Hundred 
of  Whytston',  and  suffered  judgment  in  the  court  of  the  Abbot 
of  Glaston',  and  was  hanged,  and  that  it  was  so  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  country.  And  Elyas  says  that  at  the  time  aforesaid 
of  King  John  and  the  war  he  [Richard]  was  captured  in  the 
Hundred  of  Whytston'  as  he  followed  his  cattle,  which  had  been 
taken  by  robbers,  and  by  hate  and  spite,  and  not  by  judgment, 
he  was  hanged,  and  that  so  it  was  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
country,  and  Matthew  does  likewise.  Therefore  let  a  jury  be 
made  thereon.  Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  Elyas  gives 
\  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  by  pledge  of  Thomas  de  Boreham. 

689.  Geoffry  de  Mora  confesses  that  he  owes  William  de 
Dummere  20/.  and  i  mark  touching  a  fine  made  between  them, 
of  which  [sum]  is  to  be  paid  to  him  on  the  first  Sunday  in  Lent  in 
the  27th  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  King  John 
4ar.,  and  at  Easter  next  following  5^  marks,  and  at  the  feast  of 
St.  John  the  Baptist  next  following  loo^.,  and  at  the  feast  of  St. 
Michael  next  following  iooj.,  and  on  the  Nativity  of  Our  Lx>rd 

*  This  direction  as  to  custody  ap^xrars  by  mai^nal  note.  The  subsequent 
proceedings  in  the  county  of  Dorset  wtre  of  course  recorded  later.  *^  Derstt^^ 
appears  in  the  margin  of  this  part.    This  looks  like  an  early  instance  oi  an**  injunction." 

"^  Over  this  name  is  written  *^ Alibi;  and  the  marginal  note  **  mU  — niisen- 
cotdia^'xs  struck  out. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  21 5 

next  following  loo^.     And  if  he  should  not  do  [this]  he  grants 
that  the  sheriff  may  distrain     .     .     .     chattels,  etc. 

690.  A  day  is  given  to  William  de  Holecumb*,  claimant,  and 
the  Abbot  of  Keynesham,  on  a  plea  concerning  one  moiety  of 
the  manor  of  Holecumbe  with  its  appurtenances,  except  seven 
ferlings  and  forty-seven  acres  of  land,  four  messuages,  3^.  of  rent 
of  two  mills  and  the  advowson  of  the  chapel  of  the  same  manor 
with  the  appurtenances,  ...  on  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices  in  the  county  of  Dorset  on  the  prayer  of  the  parties. 
And  let  the  writ  remain  with  the  sheriff  in  the  meantime. 
The  Abbot  puts  in  his  place  William  de  Edinton  or  Henry 
Marshall.^ 

691.  Walter  de  Pavely  against  William  Pag'  and  Thomas 
Bat  on  a  plea  of  appeal  by  Ralph  Moke  ...  on  the 
quindene  of  Easter  at  Westminster.     He  has  pledged  his  faith.* 

Memb,  11. 

692.  Adam  son  of  Goldiva  de  Cruk'  gives  \  mark  for  a 
licence  to  agree  with  Simon  de  Pillesdon  on  a  plea  of  land,  by 
pledge  of  Simon  himself.* 

693.  Henry  de  Gant  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Henry  de  Erlegh*  touching  the  suit  to  the  hundred  [court] 
of  Perton  for  the  manor  of  Poulet,  by  pledge  of  Henry  de  Erlegh' 
himself.* 

694.  John  Cote  was  summoned  to  answer  Henry  de  Gant  on 
a  plea  why  he  does  not  allow  Henry  to  have  a  certain  road 
which  he  ought  and  is  wont  to  have  beyond  the  land  of  him 
[John]  in  Strethend,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that,  because 
he  [John]  does  not  allow  him  [Henry]  to  have  that  road,  he 
is  injured  and  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of  2cxr.,  and 
thereof  he  produces  suit,  etc.  And  John  comes  and  says  that 
the  aforesaid  Henry  ought  not  to  have  any  road  there,  and 
that  if  he  had  any  road,  it  was  by  force,  and  not  by  any  right 
Afterwards  Henry  comes  and  will  not  prosecute  that  writ. 
Therefore  John  Cote  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Henry*  is 
in  mercy. 

^  See  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  in,  No.  44.     At  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of 
Michaelmas. 

*  This  is  an  essoin.  *  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  113,  No.  54 

*  "  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  115,  No.  62. 

*  **  Alibi  "  is  written  over  this  name. 


2l6  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

695.  Eborard  son  of  Walter,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty 
of  charter  against  Godfrey  del  Ausnay  concerning  four  mes- 
suages with  the  appurtenances  in  Radeclive,  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledge  to  prosecute,  namely  Walter  Page, 
are  in  mercy,  but  the  other  pledge  has  died. 

O96.  John  son  of  Michael,  who  brought  a  writ  of  entry  against 
Nicholas  son  of  Robert  concerning  one  messu.^ge  and  one  vii^ate 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Cherleton.  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Walter  the 
Clerk*  and  Gilbert  de  Gardino,  are  in  mercy. 

697.  Robert  the  Goldsmith  (aurifaber\  who  brought  a  writ 
concerning  a  fine  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King  against 
Thomas  le  Ware  and  Agnes  his  wife  of  one  third  part  of  the 
manor  of  Roweleston  with  the  appurtenances,  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Peter  Border 
and  Ebbe  de  Dicheshet',  are  in  mercy. 

698.  John  de  Stratton,  who  brought  a  writ  de  precipe^ 
gainst  Roger  son  of  Walter  and  Justine  his  wife  concerning 
twenty-two  acres  with  the  appurtenances  in  Stratton,  does 
not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges,  namely  John  de 
Mandeviir*  and  William  Marshall,  are  in  mercy. 

699.  Jordan  son  of  Gervase,  who  brought  a  writ  de  precipe 
against  Peter  the  goldsmith  {le  orfeuer^)  and  Agnes  his  wife 
concerning  one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  the  suburb 
of  Bristol!*,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  His 
pledges  have  died. 

700.  William  le  Petit,  who  brought  a  writ  de  precipe  against 
Robert  W^ulbod  concerning  half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the  appur- 
tenances in  Lehyton',  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and 
his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Walter  Turbern  and  Stephen 
de  Cranemere,  are  in  mercy. 

701.  Baldwin  le  Engleys  and  Alice  his  wife,  who  brought  a 

*  **  Alibi  "  is  written  over  this  name,  and  the  marginal  ^^  misericorditt^^  is  struck  out. 
'  This  writ  is  the  commencement  of  a  proprietary  action  that  is  to  take  place 

from  the  Brat  in  the  King's  Court.  It  stands,  as  it  were,  midway  between  the 
indubitably  possessory  assizes  and  ihe  indubitably  proprietary  writ  of  right.  It  bids 
the  tenant  give  up  the  land  claimed,  or  i>how  cause  why  he  should  not.  The  writ 
contains  some  suggestion  of  a  flaw  in  the  def  ndant's  title,  the  object  of  which  is  to 
preclude  the  defendant  from  pleading  a  general  denial,  which  would  be  appropriate 
in  the  case  of  a  writ  of  right,  and  also  to  force  the  defendant  to  answer  a  certain 
question  as  to  his  own  title,  and  so  constitute  a  question  of  fact  fit  for  a  jury.  See 
**  Hist,  of  Knglish  I^w,"  Vol.  ii    p.  63. 

*  **  Alibi '  is  written  over  this  nan.c,  but  the  marginal  '*  mie  "  is  not  struck  out. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  21/ 

writ  de  precipe  against  the  Prior  of  Staverdal'  concerning  two 
charters  which  unjustly  [he  detains]  from  them,  etc.,  does  {sic)  not 
proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
Thomas  de  la  Penne  and  Andrew  {strtick  out)  de  Sutton,  are  in 
mercy. 

702.  Eudo  de  Merland',  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty 
against  Robert  de  Merland',  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  William  le  Blun  and  Hugh 
the  Miller,  are  in  mercy. 

703.  John  de  Essebyr'  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Henry  Hastevilain  on  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter,  by 
pledge  of  Martin  de  Legh*.^ 

704.  Eudo  de  Merland,  who  brought  a  writ  against  Robert 
de  Merland  to  have  reasonable  estovers  in  Robert's  wood  in 
OrcherleghV  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely  Walter  le  Bum  and  Hugh  the  Miller,  are  in 
mercy. 

705.  Robert  de  Sparkford,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty 
of  charter  against  Robert  de  Blokesworth*  concerning  one 
virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Sparkford',  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
Thomas  de  Gracelegh*  and  Henry  de  Sparkeford',  are  in  mercy. 

706.  Thomas  de  Morton  was  summoned  to  answer  the  Prior 
of  Lanton'  on  a  plea  that  he  should  discharge  the  Prior  of  the 
service  which  Thomas  de  Cruket  requires  of  him  in  respect  of 
his  free  tenement  which  he  holds  of  the  aforesaid  Thomas  de 
Morton  in  Lodres,^  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  the  said 
Thomas  de  Cruket  distrained  him  to  pay  scutage  and  relief  to 
him  [Thomas]  in  respect  of  the  same  tenement  which  he  holds 
of  the  said  Thomas  de  Morton  by  the  service  of  one  pound  of 
cumin  for  all  services,  and  he  proffers  the  charter  of  William  de 
Morton,  brother  of  Thomas,  which  testifies  that  the  same  William 
gave  and  granted  to  one  Richard  de  Morcvill'  for  his  homage, 
etc.,  \  mark  of  silver  of  yearly  rent  at  the  feast  of  St. 
Michael  receivable  in  the  vill  of  Lodres,  to  have  and  to  hold  to 
himself  and  his  heirs  or  assigns  by  the  service  of  one  pound  ot 
cumin  yearly  ;  and  he  proffers  the  charter  of  Richard  himself, 
which  testifies  that  he  gave  the  said  rent  to  the  said  Prior  and 

*  See  *'  Somerset  Fines,"  p.   124,  No.  96.      The  land  was  in   **  Middeltoo." 
Henry's  wife  was  Alice. 

^  Orchardleigh.  *  Quctr$  Loders,  co.  Dorset. 

2   F 


21 8  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

his  church  to  hold  by  the  service  aforesaid,  and  whereby  he  is 
injured  and  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of  40^.,  etc. 
And  Thomas  de  Morton'  comes  and  defends  the  force  and 
injury,  and  fully  admits  the  aforesaid  charters  and  everything 
that  is  contained  in  them  ;  and  inasmuch  as  it  is  clearly  shown  by 
the  charters  that  the  said  rent  was  assigned  to  the  Prior  and  his 
church,  it  is  considered  that  the  aforesaid  Thomas  should  dis- 
charge the  Prior  of  the  said  rent  by  the  service  aforesaid,  and 
should  satisfy  him  in  respect  of  his  damages  and  be  in  mercy  by 
his  pledge  Stephen  de  Furnyaus. 

707.  Thomas  de  Morton  offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  John  Prior  of  Lanthon*  on  a  plea  that  he  should  do 
him  the  customary  and  rural^  service  which  he  ought  to  do 
for  his  free  tenement  in  Lodres.  And  the  Prior  does  not  come, 
etc. ;  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  It  is  adjudged  that  he  be 
attached  to  be  at  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into  the  county 
of  Dorset,  and  let  the  writ  remain  with  the  sheriff  in  the  mean- 
time. 

708.  The  Prior  of  Bermundes',  by  his  attorney,  offers  himself 
on  the  fourth  day  against  Henry  parson  of  Kinewardeston'*  on  a 
plea  that  he  should  restore  to  him  [the  Prior]  one  messuage  and 
half  a  virgate  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Kynewardeston', 
which  the  Prior  claims  against  him  as  the  right  of  his  churcii. 
And  Henry  does  not  come,  etc. ;  and  he  was  summoned,  etc 
It  is  adjudged  that  the  messuage  and  land  be  taken  into  the 
hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  a  day,  etc.,  and  let  him  be 
summoned  that  he  should  be  at  the  next  coming  of  the  justices 
into  the  county  of  Dorset,  and  let  the  writ  remain  with  the 
sheriff  in  the  meantime. 

709.  Henry  de  Ekewyk',  who  brought  [a  writ]  concerning 
customs  and  service  against  Peter  de  Mara  in  respect  of  a  tene- 
ment which  Peter  holds  of  him  in  Ekewyk*,  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Roger  de 
Whittokcsmede  and  Roger  de  la  Cume,  are  in  mercy. 

710.  Roesia  de  Lutleton',  by  her  attorney,  offers  herself  on 
the  fourth  day  against  Richard  de  la  Rivere  on  a  plea  of  two 
parts  of  one-third  part  of  one  knight's  fee  with  the  appurten- 
ances in  Horningdon.     And  Richard  docs  not  come,  etc.,  and 


'  See  note  to  No.  62(^ 
^  Kingweston. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  219 

he  was  claimant     Therefore  Roesia  [may  go]  without  a  day, 
and  Richard  is  in  mercy.^ 

711.  Robert  de  Sparkeford*  gives  los,  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Robert  de  Blokkesworth'  on  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter, 
by  pledge  of  Henry  de  Stawell*.^ 

712.  William  Warrenner  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Henry  Harald'  and  Alice  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  warranty, 
by  pledge  of  Robert  de  Midilton." 

713.  John  de  Lideford  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  William  de  BirkeFon  a  plea  of  land.  And  the  agreement  is 
such  that  while  the  same  John  and  Matilda  his  wife  have  claimed 
against  the  same  William  and  Joan  his  wife  a  third  part  of  a 
fourth  part  of  one  knight's  fee  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Hynieton'  as  the  reasonable  portion  of  Matilda  wife  of  the  same 
John,  to  wit  that  the  said  William  should  recognise  the  aforesaid 
third  part  to  be  the  right  of  Matilda  as  her  reasonable  portion 
which  fell  to  her  of  the  inheritance  of  Philip  de  Nereber' ;  and 
for  this,  etc.,  the  said  John  and  Matilda  have  granted  to  William 
the  said  third  part  with  all  the  right  of  the  eldest  {eynescia) 
which  belonged  to  John  and  Matilda  in  Hynton*,  so  that  Henry 
de  Alneto*  and  Elena  his  wife  should  do  to  the  said  William  and 
Joan  his  wife  the  homage  which  they  ought  to  do  to  the 
aforesaid  John  and  Matilda  his  wife  ;  and  William  has  granted  to 
John  and  Matilda  that  they  [William  and  Joan]  should  make 
him  {sic)  an  exchange  to  the  value  of  the  said  third  part,  in  Bery, 
in  the  county  of  Devon.  Therefore  the  sheriff  of  Somerset  is 
ordered  that  he  should  make  an  extent  and  valuation  of  the 
said  third  part  in  all  things,  and  when  this  should  be  done  should 
inform  the  sheriff  of  Devon,  so  that  he  should  make  to  the  said 
John  and  Matilda  of  the  land  of  William  and  Joan  in  Bere  an 
equivalent* 


*  Over  this  is  written  "  infra  etaiem"  and  in  the  margin  "  usque  hucy"*  meaning 
that  someone,  probably  an  excheouer  officer,  had  looked  through  the  roll  thus  far. 

*  **  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  122,  No.  90.  Robert  Blokkesworth's  wife,  Isolda,  was 
a  party.     The  land  was  in  **  Sparkeford." 

*  "Somerset  Fines,"  p.  115,  No.  60,  where  Warrenner  is  called  "le  Warner," 
and  "  Henry  Harald,"  "  Henry  Hastard."    The  land  was  in  "  Middelton." 

*  See  No.  726. 

*  This  entry  is  clumsy.  The  effect  of  it  is,  that  John  and  Matilda  have  claimed  a 
third  of  Hynlon  as  doi%er.  William  and  Joan  concede  it.  Then  John  and  his  wife 
grant  the  conceded  third  to  William  and  his  wife  in  return  for  an  equivalent  in  Devon. 


220  SOMERSETSHIRE    PLEAS. 


Memb,  \\d, 

714.  Margery  de  Sumcry  was  summoned  to  answer  Henry 
de  Gant  on  a  j)lea  that  she  should  permit  Henry  to  take  turi 
{turbam)  on  the  land  of  Margery  in  Were*  for  the  repair  of  the 
dams  {excliisas)  and  pond  of  Henry's  mill  in  the  same  vill,  which 
he  ought  and  is  wont  to  take  there,  and  whereon  it  is  complained 
that,  while  he  is  accustomed  to  have  turf  from  the  land  of 
Margery  in  Were  for  the  amendment  of  the  aforesaid  mill,  etc., 
[as  was-]  Robert  de  Gurney,  who  held  that  mill,  and  who  gave  it 
to  him  [Henry]  by  his  charter,  which  he  proffers,  and  which  testi- 
fies this,  she  [Margery]  does  not  permit  him  to  take  turf  from  the 
said  land  for  the  amendment  of  the  said  mill,  whereby  he  is  in- 
jured and  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of  6ar.,  and  thereof 
he  produces  suit.  And  Margery,  by  her  attorney,  conies  and 
defends  the  force  and  injury,  etc.,  and  says  that  she  fully  grants 
that  he  may  have  such  turf  in  the  said  land  as  he  ought  to  have. 
And  because  Henry  does  not  know  how  to  define  within  what 
metes  and  bounds  he  ought  to  take  such  turf  on  the  said  land, 

the  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  assemble  twelve,  whether  

knights,  etc.,  of  the  vicinage  of  Were,  by  whom,  etc.,*  to  view  the  ^ 

mill  and  pond,  and  that  they  should  be  before  the  justices  on  — 

their  next  coming  into  the  county  of  Dorset,  to  certify  by  what  % 

metes  and  bounds  the  said  Henry,  during  the  time  when  the  mill  " — 

was  in  his  hand,  was  accustomed  to  take  turf  from  the  land  of  \ 

the  said  Margery  in  Were,  and  in  the  meantime  [let  them  satisfy] 
themselves  so  that  [they  may  be  able  more  fully  to  certify]  the 

said  justices,  etc.** 

715.  Peter  de  Bere  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day  against 
Robert  son  of  Adam  on  a  plea  of  a  third  part  of  one  ferling  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Wolwardeston'*of  which  Emelota 
daughter  of  Robert,  kinswoman  of  him  [Peter],  whose  heir  [he  is], 
was  seised  in  her  demesne,  etc.,  on  the  day  on  which  [she  died]. 
Robert  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  otherwise  made  default,  so  that  the 
land   was  taken  into  the  hand   of  our   lord  the   King.      The 

*  Wcare.  ^  Some  such  words  as  these  seem  to  have  been  omitted. 

*  **  By  whom,"  that  is,  "the  truth  may  Iw  made  known." 

*  The  entry  is  condensed  thus  :  **  AV  interim  se  ila  inde  etc.  ut  predictos  Justi' 
r/Vjr/<)j "  evidently  taken  from  the  form  of  writ  set  out  in  Bract.,  fo.  3'9^*-i  ***'' 
i Hit  rim  tcrram  illam  videant  et  se  in.ie  interim  certijicent  quod  nos  vcl  justiciaries 
noitro^  ad  pre  fat  um  terminnm  plenius  itide  ccrtificare  po^suutJ*^ 

*  Woolslon,  in  Bicknoller. 


V 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  221 

sheriff  appointed  a  day,  etc.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Peter  should  recover  his  seisin  of  the  land,  and  Robert  is  in 
mercy. 

716.  Henry  de  Bykefaud  offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  William  Wyting  on  a  plea  that  he  should  perform  to 
Henry  the  customary  and  rural  service  for  the  free  tenement 
which  he  holds  of  him  [Henry]  in  Worlegh'.^  And  William  does 
not  come,  etc.  ;  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  It  is  adjudged 
that  he  be  [present]  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into 
the  county  of  Dorset,  etc.,  and  that  the  writ  remain  with  the 
sheriff  in  the  meantime. 

717.  Geoffry  de  Maundeviir  confesses  that  he  owes  Geoffry 
de  Brideport  300  marks  to  be  repaid  within  two  years  and  a 
half,  beginning  at  Easter  in  the  27th  year  of  the  reig^  of  King 
Henry  son  of  King  John,  so  that  if  the  aforesaid  money  should 
not  be  fully  repaid  within  that  time  Geoffry  de  Maundevill* 
granted  for  himself  and  his  heirs  that  Geoffry  de  Brideport 
might  have  the  manor  of  Estkoker  with  the  hundred  [court] 
and  the  advowson  of  the  church  of  the  same  manor  and  all 
other  appurtenances  without  any  withholding  {sine  ullo  retene- 
mentd)  quit  of  the  aforesaid  Geoffry  and  his  heirs  for  ever,  as. in 
the  writing  of  covenant  made  between  them,  and,  further,  in  the 
charter  of  feoffment  of  the  said  manor  which  the  said  Geoffry 
de  Maundeviir  made  to  Geoffry  de  Brideport,  and  which  is 
deposited  in  the  Abbey  of  Glaston  as  even  hand  between  them 
more  fully  appears,  etc. 

718.  The  same  Geoffry  de  Maundeviir  confesses  that  he 
owes  Richard  de  Bune,  parson  of  the  church  of  Hardinton',  50 
marks  sterling,  which  he  should  repay  to  him,  his  heirs  or  assigns, 
by  half-yearly  instalments,  namely  at  the  feast  of  St.  Michael  in 
the  27th  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry  son  of  King  John  20 
marks,  and  at  Easter  next  following  20  marks,  and  at  the 
feast  of  St.  Michael  next  following  10  marks,  so  that  if  the 
said  money  should  not  be  fully  repaid  within  the  said  time, 
Geoffry  granted,  for  himself  and  his  heirs,  that  Richard  or  his 
heirs  might  have  the  manor  of  Kinton*,*  with  the  advowson  of 
the  church  of  the  same  manor  and  with  all  other  appurtenances, 
without  any  withholding,  quit  of  the  said  Geoffry  and  his  heirs 
for  ever,  as  in  the  writing  of  covenant  made  between  them ;  and, 
further,  in  the  charter  of  feoffment  of  the  aforesaid  manor  which 

*  Worle,  or  Warleigh.  *  Keinton  Mandevill. 


222  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


the  said  Geoffry  made  to  the  said  Richard  and  deposited  until 
the  term  aforesaid  in  the  Abbey  of  Mucholeneye,  as  even  hand 
between  them  {in  equa  manu\  more  fully  appears,  etc. 

At  the  foot  of  this  membrane,  on  a  fragment  of  parchment  stitched  to  it,  apparently 
as  a  label  to  the  whole  roll. 

Pleas  of  juries,  of  assize  and  of  the  crown  before  Roger  de 
.  .  .  and  his  associates,  justices  in  eyre  at  Ivelcestr, 
.  .  .  Somerset,  in  the  27th  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
Henry  son  of  King  John.  Somerset  eyre  in  the  27th  year 
of  the  reign  of  King  Henry. 

Memb,  12. 

719.  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Richard  le  Vallet,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  dower  against  William  le  Neweman,  does 
not  prosecute  her  writ.  Therefore  she  is  in  mercy.  And  her 
promise  was  her  pledge  because  she  is  poor  (et  fides  fuit  pF  ^ 
pauper)} 

720.  Roesia,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  le  Daneis,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  dower  against  Walter  de  Chamberleng*  and 
against  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Adam  le  Daneys,  and 
against  William  le  Chamberleng'  and  William  de  Engelby,  does 
not  prosecute  her  writ.  Therefore  Roesia  and  her  pledges, 
namely  John  the  Usher  {pstiarius)  and  Robert  de  Dilinton',  are 
in  mercy. 

721.  Alice  daughter  of  Thomas,  who  brought  a  writ  of  war- 
ranty of  charter  against  Osbert  son  of  Thomas,  does  not  prosecute 
her  writ.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges,  namely  William  de 
Bona  Villa  and  Roger  de  Notiford,  are  in  mercy. 

722.  Matilda  de  Wilescumb*,  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty 
of  charter  against  William  son  of  Roger,  does  not  prosecute  her 
writ.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges,  namely  John  de  Everleya 
and  John  Witloc,  are  in  mercy. 

723.  Walter  de  Helton',  who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty  of 
charter  [concerning]  one  virgatc  of  land  with  the  appurtenances 
in  Henxereg  against  Nicholas  de  Mcrict,  does  not  prosecute  his 

*  If  a  claimant  could  not  find  pledges  he  might  be  trusted  on  his  solemn  promise 
to  porsecule  his  suit,  especially  in  criminal  proceedings,  that  justice  might  l)e  done. 
See  Glanv.,  lib.  14,  cap.  I  ;  also  *' Kegiam  Majcslatem,*'  lib.  4,  c.  1,  **5'/  autem 
accu'iator  ple^ios  *ion  habucrit^  Jidii  sua:  religionis  soiet  commxtti^  sicut  tn  ommbus 
f>la(itis  dt/eionia,** 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  223 


writ     Therefore  he  [Walter]  and  his  pledges,  namely  Henry  de 
Mileburn'  and  Richard  de  Sorye,  are  in  mercy. 

724.  Alina,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  Attewode,  who 
brought  a  writ  of  dower  against  John  Comyn,  and  against 
Ralph  le  Tornur,  and  against  Jordan  de  Hereford',  does  not 
prosecute  her  writ.  Therefore  she  [Alina]  and  her  pledges, 
namely  Colin  de  Noers  and  Patrick  de  Munford,  are  in  mercy. 

725.  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of  Hugh  Viresun,  seeks 
against  Hugh  Tunayre  a  third  part  of  twenty  acres  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Middelkote  as  her  dower,  etc.  And 
Hugh  comes  and  says  that  she  ought  not  to  have  dower  therein, 
because  the  said  Hugh  Viresun  did  not  on  the  day  on  which  he 
married  Christiana,  or  ever  afterwards,  hold  the  said  land  in 
demesne,  etc.,  so  as  to  have  been  able  to  dower  her  thereout, 
and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country,  and  Christiana 
does  likewise.  Therefore  let  a  jury  be  had,  who  say  upon  their 
oath  that  the  said  Hugh  Viresun  did  not  hold  the  said  land  on 
the  day  on  which  he  married  her,  or  ever  afterwards,  in  his 
demesne,  so  that  he  might  have  been  able  to  dower  her  thereout. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Hugh  Tunayre  [may  go]  without 
a  day,  and  Christiana^  is  in  mercy.     Let  her  be  in  custody. 

726.  John  de  Lideford*  and  Matilda  his  wife  seek  against 
Henry  del  Ausnay*  and  Elena  his  wife  a  third  part  of  a  moiety 
of  half  a  knight's  fee  with  the  appurtenances  in  Hyneton*  as  the 
right  of  her,  Matilda.  And  Henry,  for  himself  and  Elena  his 
wife,  comes  and  by  licence  gives  up  to  him  {ei)  the  said  third 
part,  and  let  him  be  in  mercy  because  he  did  not  give  it  up 
before.     He  made  fine  for  lar.,  by  pledge  of  Thomas  de  Santon. 

727.  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Legh*,  seeks 
against  Peter  Ernewy  a  third  part  of  ten  acres  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances  in  Legh  as  her  dower,  etc.  And  Peter  does  not 
come,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment :  Let  the  third 
part  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  etc.,  and  a 
day,  etc.  And  let  him  be  summoned  that  he  be  [present]  on 
the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into  the  county  of  Dorset 

728.  Maurice  de  Borreham  offers  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  John  Morin,  on  a  plea  that  he  [John]  should  pay  him 
16  marks  which  he  owes  him  and  unjustly  detains,  as  [Maurice] 
says.  And  John  docs  not  come,  etc.,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc, 
Judgment;  Let  him  be  distrained  by  his  lands  and  chattels,  etc 

^  Over  her  name  is  "  uiAii.^*  '  See  No.  713. 


224  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

SO  that  [the  sheriff]  should  have  his  body  against  the  next 
coming  of  the  justices  into  the  county  of  Dorset;  and  in  the 
meantime  let  the  writ  remain  with  the  sheriff. 

729.  Thomas  de  Santon  sought  in  the  county  [court]  Adam 
de  Aywod  as  his  fugitive  villein,  etc.,  so  that  Adam  brought  a 
writ  of  our  lord  the  King  de  libertate  sua  probanda.  And  now 
the  said  Adam  comes  and  says  that  he  is  a  free  man,  and  that 
his  ancestors  were  free  men,  because  one  Algar  de  la  Wyke,  his 
grandfather,  who  was  a  free  man  and  held  his  land  freely  in  la 
Wyke,  had  two  sons,  one  Robert,  father  of  the  said  Adam,  and 
one  Roger,  father  of  William  de  la  Wyke,  who  is  present,  a  free 
man  and  lord  {dominus)  of  la  Wyke  ;  and  he  says  that  on  his 
mother's  side  {ex parte  matris)  there  was  one  Daniel,  a  free  man, 
who  had  two  daughters,  one  Edith,  the  elder,  and  another  Julia, 
mother  of  a  certain  Ralph  de  Lapse,  who  is  present,  and  says 
that  he  ib  a  free  man  and  kinsman  of  the  said  Adam,  as  he  says. 
And  Thomas  comes  and  says  that  [Adam]  is  a  villein,  and 
that  Algar  his  ancestor  had  a  certain  brother,  Alrig*  by  name, 
who  had  a  son  Nicliolas,  and  of  Nicholas  came  one  John,  his 
son,  who  is  present,  and  confesses  that  he  is  a  villein  ;  and  he 
says  that  on  the  part  of  the  mother  of  Adam  there  was  a  certain 
Aubrey,  who  had  Matilda  the  mother  of  him  [Adam],  and  she 
[Aubrey?]  had  a  son  Alexander.  From  Alexander  there  was 
issue  Richard,  who  is  present,  and  confesses  himself  a  villein  and 
kinsman  of  the  said  Adam.  He  says  that  the  aforesaid  William 
de  la  Wyke  and  Ralph  de  Lapse,  who  call  themselves  relatives 
(parentes)  of  Adam,  are  not  of  his  relationship  (parentela)  ;  and 
he  offers  our  lord  the  King  ^  mark  that  inquiry  may  be  made 
by  the  county  whether  they  arc  relatives  of  Adam,  as  Adam 
says,  or  not,  and  it  is  received.  And  because  the  said  William 
and  Ralph  were  born  in  the  county  of  Devon,  a  day  is  given 
them  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  in  those  parts ;  and 
then  let  the  inquest  be  made. 

730.  Geoffry  de  Langclegh  was  summoned  to  answer 
Michael,  Abbot  of  Glaston,  on  a  pica  why  he  surcharged 
{sWhoneravit)  the  Abbot's  common  of  pasture  in  Askote 
and  Wauton',  and  whereon  the  Abbot  complains  that  Geoffry 
has  in  the  pasture  one  hundred  and  fifty  goats  and  twenty  oxen 
or  cows  beyond  the  number  which  his  ancestors  and  he  were 
wont  always  to  have  in  the  pasture,  to  wit  sixteen  oxen  only, 
and  thereby  he  [the  Abbot]  is  injured  and  has  [suffered]  damage 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  225 

to  the  value  of  40  marks ;  and  thereof  he  produces  suit.  And 
Geoffry  comes  and  defends  the  force  and  injury  and  everything, 
etc.,  and  says  that  he  ought  not  to  answer  him  on  this  writ, 
because  he  says  that  the  suit  was  never  brought  in  the  county 
[court],  and  that  he  was  never  summoned,^  and  thereon  lie  puts 
himself  upon  the  record  of  the  county  [court].  And  the  county 
testifies  that  the  suit  was  never  in  the  county  [court],  and  that 
Geoffry  was  never  summoned  in  the  county  [court].  Therefore 
Geoffry  [may  go]  without  a  day. 

731.  Henry  son  of  Robert  de  Cheleworth',  who  brought  a 
writ  of  entry  against  William  de  Cheleworth'  concerning  four 
acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Cheleworth*,-  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
Philip  de  Ardene  and  Walter  Wys,  are  in  mercy." 

732.  Thomas  de  FerrV  who  brought  a  writ  of  covenant 
against  Geoffry  de  Grascy  concerning  one  messuage  and  six 
acres  of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Nortkoker,  does  not 
proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely 
John  de  Aula  and  William  Young  {Juvenis),  are  in  mercy. 

733.  Ralph  Russcl,  of  Edmeston,  who  brought  a  writ*  of 
caption  of  his  homage  and  reasonable  relief  in  respect  of  the 
tenement  which  he  holds  of  Robert  de  Eston  in  Edenigston*  and 
against  Roger  de  Cheselode  concerning  the  tenement  which  he 
[Ralph]  holds  of  him  in  la  Fcnne,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore 
he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  William  de  Knaplek' 
and  Peter  de  Bere,  are  in  mercy. 

734.  Henry  de  Cheleworth',  who  brought  a  writ  against 
William  le  Bum  concerning  common  of  pasture  in  Cheleworth*, 
of  which  Robert  de  Chcleworth',  father  of  Henry,  died  seised, 
etc.,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely  Nicholas  son  of  Robert  and  Nicholas  de 
Nordariis,  are  in  mercy.* 

^  A  suit  might  be  removed  from  the  county  court  to  the  court  of  the  King  by  a 
writ  called  the  **  Pone"  Such  vvrit  could  not  properly  be  obtained  until  there  was 
actually  a  plaint  before  the  former  court,  that  is,  until  after  the  parties  were 
summoned  before  it.  If  there  was  no  summons  there  was  no  plaint,  and  the  fact 
could  he  pleaded  in  abatement  of  the  Pone,  as  issued  upon  a  false  suggestion.  See 
Bract.,  fo.  330b,  and  *'  Brilt.,"  Bk.  1.,  cap.  32,  pi.  14.  '  Chelwood. 

'  "  Aithi "  is  written  over  Walter's  name.  *  Over  this  name  is  " Nihil" 

•  The  form  of  the  writ  would  be  "  quod  capiat  homa^uti:  et  racionabiU  reiivium 
suunt  d(  lihero  tennnento  sua  quod  tenet  et  de  eo  tenere  clamat  in"  etc. 

•  **  Aihil"  is  attached  to  the  namts  of  both  pledges,  and  the  marginal  **  miseri- 
cor  die  "  is  struck  out. 

2    G 


226  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

735.  Richard  son  of  Bernard,  Warin  de  Welleslegh',  and 
William  the  Steward  (Je  Seneschel\  vho  brought  a  writ  of  entry 
against  the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  Wells  touching  the  manor  of 
Bidesham  with  the  appurtenances,  do  not  proceed.  Therefore 
they  and  their  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely,  Adam  de  Cumpton 
and  Philip  de  Arden',  are  in  mercy. 

Memb.  I2d, 

736.  William  Tropinel  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  the  Abbot  of  Glaston'  on  a  plea  of  covenant,  by  pledge  of 
Walter  de  Pilton'  and  Robert  de  Berton'.^ 

737.  Walter  de  Estmodesham  was  summoned  to  warrant 
Sampson  de  Haydon'  in  respect  of  one  messuage  and  ten  acres 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Heydon*  which  he  [Sampson] 
holds  and  [claims]  to  hold  of  him  [Walter],  etc.,  and  whereon, 
etc.  And  Walter  comes  and  admits  that  Sampson  holds  the  said 
tenement  of  him  by  the  service  of  eighteen-pence  yearly  for  all 
services,  and  he  will  willingly  warrant  him  if  he  should  be 
impleaded  in  respect  thereof  Therefore  let  him  warrant 
[Sampson]  if  it  should  be  necessary. 

738.  William  de  Insula,'  who  brought  a  writ  of  covenant 
against  William  Avenel  concerning  one  messuage  and  lOOs.  in 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Bukinton',  does  not  proceed. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Richard 
Grudge  and  William  le  Smale,  are  in  mercy.* 

739.  Alan  de  Halesworth'  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree 
with  Geoffry  de  Maundevill*  on  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter, 
etc. 

740.  Nicholas  de  Dunheved\who  brought  a  writ  of  warranty 
of  charter  against  Ernisius  de  Dunheved  touching  the  manor 
of  Dunheved*  with  its  appurtenances,  does  not  proceed.  There- 
fore he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit  John  de  Thorevgny 
and  Robert  the  reeve  of  Dunheved,  are  in  mercy. 

^  •*  Somerset  Fines  "p.  113  No.  53.  Topacia  is  named  as  the  wife  of  William, 
and  Adam  Blund  and  Joan  his  wife  are  paities  with  them.     The  land  was  in  Pilton. 

'^  There  is  a  note  over  William's  name,  *•  He  has  no  land." 

^  In  the  margin  is  a  note,  which  I  read  as  ^^  usque  hucJ*^  It  is  in  the  hand- 
writing of  the  time,  and  I  take  it  to  be  a  note  of  some  official,  possibly  of  the 
Exchequer,  who  has  perused  or  checked  the  roll,  for  amercements  or  some  other 
purpose  thus  far,  or  can  it  be  by  Bracton  himself,  made  during  his  search  for 
authorities?  That  Bracton  did  mark  in  a  particular  way  many  of  the  existing 
rol  seems  to  be  pretty  clearly  shown  by  Prof.  Maitland  :  see  Introd.  to  "Bracton's 
Note  Book,"  .p  66.  "•  Downhead. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  227 


741.  Michael  Abbot  of  Glaston*  offers  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  William  the  reeve  of  Glaston*  on  a  plea  of  customs 
and  service  which  the  Abbot  brought  against  the  said  William 
concerning  the  tenement  which  William  holds  of  the  Abbot  in 
Glaston',  and  which  [customs,  etc.],  William  does  not  admit,  and 
on  which  [plea]  the  Abbot  brought  a  writ  of  our  lord  the  King 
that  the  sheriff  should  cause  a  record  to  be  made  in  the  county 
[court]  of  the  said  services,  etc.  And  the  sheriff  produced  the 
record,  etc.  And  William  does  not  come,  etc.  He  was  sought, 
etc.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  Abbot  [may  go]  without 
a  day,  and  William  is  in  mercy. 

742.  Emma  the  wife  of  William  de  Horsy  puts  in  her  place 
Robert  Fichet  against  John  de  Brywer'  and  others  named  in  the 
writ  on  a  plea  of  dower,  etc 

Memb,  13. 

Pleas  of  the  Crown  at  Yhevelcestr'  on  the  quindene  of  St.  Hilary, 
before  Roger  deThurkileby  and  his  companions,  in  the  27th 
year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

743.  Englishry  is  presented  in  this  county  by  two  on  the 
father's  side  and  two  on  the  mother's  side,  as  well  in  respect  of 
misadventure  as  in  other  cases,  and  only  concerning  males.^ 

The  Hundred  of  Bath  comes  by  twelve. 

744.  Adam  de  Forda,  outlawed  for  the  death  of  Thomas  his 
brother,  was  afterwards  taken  at  Kaynesham  with  the  theft 
(cum  latro(f)  and  there  hanged.  His  chattels  [were  worth] 
I2s.  6d.  The  Prior  of  Bath  took  them,  and  because  he 
took  them  without  warrant  he  is  in  mercy.  And  the  twelve 
jurors  now  testify  that  Adam  never  was  outlawed,  and  by  their 
verdict  they  presented  that  he  was  an  outlaw,  so  they  are  all  in 
mercy.  The  township  of  Ford  are  in  mercy  because  they  buried 
him  without  view  of  thp  coroners  and  because  they  have  presented 
no  finder.^  Englishry  was  not  presented,  therefore  murder.  And 
the  jury  testify  that  Adam  was  hanged  at  Kaynesham. 

*  See  Introd : 

'  If  the  coroners  had  l)een  informed  it  would  have  been  their  duty  to  have 
attached  the  finder  of  the  body  of  the  slain  against  the  coming  of  the  justicfs  (Bract., 
fo.  1 2 lb).  The  "township"  here  is  spoken  of  in  the  plural  number.  Sometimes  (e,g.. 
No,  764)  the  singular  number  is  used,  as  if  it  were  a  corporation.  For  some  purposes 
it  wns  in  fact  regarded  as  having  a  collective,  or  almost  corporate, capacity.  As  to  the 
c|uesiion  of  Englishry  in  this  case,  see  Introd. 


745-  Robert  le  Gredere,  of  Shokerwyk',  was  taken  on  suspicion 
of  theft  and  imprisoned  at  Ivelcestr',  He  was  liberated  by 
Henry,  the  sheriff's  clerk.  Therefore  to  judgment  upon  him.' 
The  jurors  testify  that  Robert  was  taken  through  the  hate  and 
spite  which  one  Roger  de  Sokerwyk'  bore  towards  him,  and  that 
he  was  not  guilty  of  any  theft ;  and  the  tithing  of  Sokerwyk'  main- 
prised  him  to  have  him  before  the  justices,  and  they  had 
him  not.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  Robert  may  come  back 
if  he  wishes. 

746.  William  le  Beo  was  found  dead  on  the  road  leading  to 
{versi's)  the  church  of  VVodewyk','  without  a  wound.  Felise  de 
Wodewyk',  who  first  found  him,  comes  and  is  not  suspected,  nor 
is  any  one  else.     No  Engllshry,  etc.     Therefore  murder. 

747.  Giles?  {Giiie)  Michel  and  Alice  of  Ireland,  strangers 
and  thieves  (latroties  exlratui),  fled  to  the  church  of  Walekot* 
and  confessed  thefts,  and  abjured  the  realm.  They  had  no 
chattels. 

748.  William  de  Yhadefenn',  of  the  county  of  Wilton,  killed 
his  wife  and  fled  to  the  church  of  Forda,'  tn  this  county. 
He  confessed  the  deed,  and  has  abjured  the  realm.  He  had  no 
chattels. 

749.  Concerning  the  demesnes  of  our  lord  the  King,  they  say 
that  the  Prior  of  Bath  holds  the  township  (villalam)  of  Bath  of 
our  lord  the  King  at  £^0  per  annum  at  the  will  of  our  lord  the 
King. 

750.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  the  Prior  of  Bath, 
the  Abbess  of  Werewell',  John  de  Chamfiur',  John  Hose  of 
Cherlecumbe,  James  Hose,  Walter  de  Wyk',  Haskoyl'  de 
Weston,  Benedict  de  Wodewyk',  Walter  de  Bath',  Hugh  Chanu, 
William  son  of  Hawise,  Geoffry  Hose,  Thomas  Sveyn,  Thomas 
le  Parker,  and  Peter  Gar^ate  did  not  come  on  the  first  day,  etc. 


The  Manor  of  Cunukesbvk'  comes  by  six, 

751.  Eva  de  Kungresbyr'  was  bound  in  her  house  at 
Kungrcsbyr',  it  is  not  known  by  whom.  No  one  is  suspected 
except  stranger  thieves. 

752.  Isabella  daughter  of  Pinnok'  was  found  drowned  {sub- 
viersa)  in  a  certain  ditch  against  the  gate  {contra  hostiuni)  of  the 

'  Qa/tre,  on  Ihc  sheriff,  or  hiB  clerk  ? 

'  Woodwick,  a  benefice  now  Jepopulated  aril  aniieneil  to  FrtMihford. 

'   Waltol,  •  liaUi.ord. 


.   SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  229 

said  Pinnok*,  and  the  jury  presented  no  finder.     Therefore  they 
are  all  in  mercy. 

.753.  Adam  Kade  struck  himself  with  a  certain  knife  in  the 
belly  so  that  he  straightway  died.  No  one  else  is  suspected. 
Therefore  judgment /^/<?  de  se.  His  chattels  [are  worth]  46J.  8^/., 
for  which  the  township  of  Kungres'  must  answer.  And  John  de 
Wyka,  one  of  the  six  jurors,  is  in  mercy.^ 

754.  Nicholas  Kade  and  Edith  his  servant  {famuia)  were 
attached  for  that  death  because  they  were  in  the  house  when  the 
aforesaid  Adam  struck  himself  in  the  belly,  and  the}'^  are  not 
suspected.  Therefore  they  may  go  quit.  And  John  de  Wyka, 
one  of  the  six  jurors,  is  in  mercy  because  of  his  lie.  He  made 
fine  for  ^  mark,  by  pledge  of  Adam  Crok'. 

The  Hundred  of  Yhatton'  comes  by  twelve. 

755.  Richard  the  Weaver  {le  Teler),  of  Yhatton,  was  killed  on 
the  King*s  highway  {via  regia)  of  Yhatton  in  the  night ;  and 
John  Wyne,  of  Clive,  fled  to  the  church  of  Yhatton  and  confessed 
that  he  killed  him,  and  he  has  abjured  the  realm.  No  other  is 
suspected.  His  chattels,  which  [were  worth]  18^.,  J.  Bishop,  of 
Bath,  took.  Afterwards  it  was  testified  that  the  chattels  were 
committed  to  William  the  Tithingman  and  Walter  son  of 
Gi  .  .  ,  and  now  they  have  them  not.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  No  Englishry  was  presented  in  the  county  [court]. 
Therefore  murder.  And  the  twelve  jurors  do  not  present  a 
finder,  and  moreover  falsely  present  Englishry.  Therefore  all 
are  in  mercy.  And  John  Wyne  was  in  the  tithing  of  William 
the  Tithingman,  of  la  Wyk'.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy  for  the 
flight. 

756.  W^illiam  Denebaud  was  found  dead  in  his  bed,  without 
wound.  Bissop,  who  first  found  him,  comes  and  is  not  suspected, 
nor  is  any  other.     No  Englishry,  etc.,  and  therefore  murder. 

757.  Osbert  de  Clyve,  William  the  gardiner,  and  Walter 
Lug,  accused  of  the  death  of  Richard  de  Whythand,  have  fled, 
and  are  outlawed  upon  the  suit  in  the  county  [court]  of  Walter 
Whythand,  his  brother.  They  were  in  the  tithing  of  William 
Esgar  in  Clive.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy  for  the  flight. 
Osbert s  chattels  2\s.,  for  which  the  township   of  Clive   must 

*  The  reason  why  he  was  amerced  is  somewhat  insufficiently  stated  in  the  next 
entry. 


230  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

answer.  And  the  twelve  jurors  concealed  those  chattels 
because  they  only  presented  I2s.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 
The  others  had  no  chattels.  Let  fuller  inquiry  be  made  in 
the  hundred  of  Porbyr',  where  the  appeal  was  made. 

758.  Roger  Hevel  of  Jatton,  accused  of  theft,  comes  and 
puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  The  jury  say 
that  they  suspect  Roger,  for  that  he  is  wont  to  steal  oxen  and 
sheep,  etc.,  and  is  also  a  burglar.*  Therefore,  etc.*  He  had 
no  chattels. 

Memb.  i^d. 

The  Hundred  of  Yhatton — continued. 

759.  Richard  de  Mora  and  Henry  of  the  same,  accused  of 
this,  that  they  are  held  to  have  found  treasure,'  come,  and 
Richard  Revel  says  that  Richard  de  Mora  spoke  to  him  and 
asked  him  to  go  with  him  to  a  certain  place  called  Waymerham 
to  dig  for  treasure.  And  Richard  de  Mora  and  Henry  come 
and  defend  that  they  found  any  treasure,  or  that  they  dug  for 
treasure  anywhere,  and  thereon  they  put  themselves  upon  the 
country.  The  jurors  say  that  they  have  not  found  any  treasure, 
and  that  they  are  not  guilty.     Therefore  they  may  go  quit 

760.  Thomas  Maureward,  Philip  his  brother,  William  Chese, 
Robert  Porterosc,  Th'.  le  Hunte,*  Simon  the  baker,*  John  son  of 
Erriol,  and  Adam  Scharp',  whom  Lewina  la  Frankelayn  appealed 
of  the  peace  and  robbery,  come.  Lewina  is  dead,  and  no  one  else 
sues  them.  It  is  testified  by  the  jurors  that  they  beat  her  so 
that  for  a  great  while  she  lay  ill,  but  did  not  die  thereof,  [/>.  of  the 
beating.]  Therefore  they  are  all  in  mercy.  Philip  made  fine 
for   \  mark  by   pledge  of  Thomas   Maureward*,   and   Robert 

^  So  I  render  **  burg\"  which  I  venture  to  extend  to  burf^ator, 

'  This  probably  means  that  he  is  to  be  hanged  :  **sus'"  in  the  margin.  The 
clerk's  note  of  the  judgment  is  at  least  compendious.  I  do  not  think  that  it  means  tid 
judicium^  or  that  the  *'  sus'  "  in  the  margin  may  have  been  added  after  considermtioQ 
of  his  case. 

'  Fraudulent  concealment  of  treasure  trove  was  criminal  (Bract.,  fo.  104b). 
**  Treasure"  was  an  ancient  deposit  of  which  no  memory  existed,  and  which  therefore 
had  no  owner.  Anciently  the  natural  right  of  the  finder,  it  had  become  by  law  of 
nations  the  pro))erty  of  the  King.  If  a  person  were  suspected  of  having  fotmd 
treasure  he  was  to  be  attached  to  be  before  the  justices,  when  the  truth  could  be 
declared  by  the  country.  There  might  l>e  presumptions  against  him,  e^.^  that  he  had 
shown  more  lavish  expenditure,  or  that  he  had  l>een  in  the  possession  of  unu>>iial 
wealth.  If  guilty  he  was  to  be  imprisonetl  until  he  made  a  heavy  fme  to  the  King 
(Bract.,  fo.  120). 

^  There  is  a  small  cross  over  these  names. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  23 1 

^        I  I  ■  -  _        ■  ■   ■   .  ■  —    -  ■    —  ^.   I  ■         I  — . 

Porterose  made  fine  for  ^  mark  by  pledge  of  Stephen  the 
Chamberlain.  John  does  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Peter 
Thorel  and  Walter  le  Frankelain.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 
The  others  were  not  attached  because  they  were  not  found. 

761.  The  same  Thomas  Maureward',  [who]  appealed  Henry 
de  Worthuir  and  Richard  the  son  of  William  the  Clerk,  Hugh 
the  cook,  and  William  Ruffus  of  the  peace  and  of  beating,  etc., 
came  and  withdrew  himself.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute,  namely,  Thomas  le  Den  of  Kyngeston*  and  William 
de  Haghermere  of  KHvedon,  are  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for 
himself  and  his  pledges  for  4Cxr.,  by  pledge  of  Henry  Cole  of 
Kenn*,  Henry  Maleysel,  Walter  Frankelayn,  and  Richard  the 
Hundredman.^ 

762.  The  same  Thomas  appealed  Luke  brother  of  John  the 
chaplain  of  Yhatton,  and  Wolward  the  Chapman  of  the  peace 
and  beating,  etc.  None  of  them  come  except  Henry  de  Worh- 
thuir.*  Luke  was  attached  by  Richard  le  May  of  Yhatton'  and 
Richard  de  la  Herdewyk'  of  the  same.  Wolward  was  attached 
by  Richard  the  Hundredman  and  Walter  Brekebare  of  the 
same.  Richard  son  of  William  was  attached  by  Robert  de  la 
Tune  of  Yhatton  and  Silvester  of  the  .same.  Hugh  the  Cook 
was  attached  by  John  the  Ploughman  of  Aldideford'  and  Adam 
Sot  of  the  same.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  And  the  jury 
testify  that  Henry  and  the  others  are  guilty  of  that  beating. 
Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  Henry  made  fine  for  i  mark  by 
pledge  of  Walter  Pruet  of  Yhatton  and  Henry  de  Chany. 

763.  Touching  defaults,  they  [the  presenting  jury]  say  that 
John  de  Ken,*  Geoffry  de  Maloysel,  Humphrey  the  Franklin,  and 
Gilbert  Poyn  do  not  come,  etc.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Chyu*  comes  by  twelve. 

764.  William  Dolling,  Hawise  his  wife,  Thomas  his  son,  and 
three  daughters  were  killed  in  his  house  at  Chyu.  Walter  de 
Hamme  and  Robert  Prentuc  were  taken  on  the  indictment  of 

*  The  meaning  of  this  and  the  next  appeal  appears  somewhat  obscure.  Possiily 
there  were  two  assaults,  and  some  of  the  appellees  took  part  in  both.  One  ap])eal 
was  withdrawn,  and  the  other  prosecuted  to  effect. 

'  See  preceding  entry. 

*  Over  this  name  is  written  *'q'  p  bre  I^."  Because  the  marginal  *'mTe"  is  struck 
out,  I  presume  that  the  interlineation  applies  to  all  the  persons  named.  The  note 
may  be  read  as  "  quieti per  breve  rcgis,^^ 

*  Chew. 


232  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

Agnes,  William's  daughter,  and  were  hanged  on  the  delivery 
of  the  gaol  before  the  justices.  No  Englishry  [was  presented], 
therefore  murder.  It  is  testified  that  the  township  of  Chyu  did 
not  make  pursuit  after  them  {nd  fe^  sectam  post  eos\  as  it  ought 
to  have  done.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

765.  Malefactors  came  by  night  to  the  house  of  Richard 
Rok  and  bound  him  and  his  wife,  and  carried  off  his  chattels. 
Osbert  le  Wistler  of  Chyu  released  him,  and  Osbert  does  not 
come.  Roger  de  Cheseford*  with  his  tithing  mainprised  to  have 
him  here,  and  he  has  not  got  him.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 
The  jurors  say  that  Osbert  is  not  guilty  of  that  binding. 
Therefore  let  him  be  quit  thereof. 

^66.  Robert  de  la  Forde  of  Chyu  fell  dead  suddenly  as  he 
went  in  the  way.  John  his  son  first  >found  him.  He  does  not 
come.  He  was  attached  by  Robert  de  Chyu  and  Gilbert 
Thorald*.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  No  one  is  suspected. 
Judgment,  misadventure.  No  Englishry  [is  presented,]  and 
therefore  murder.  The  twelve  jurors  concealed  that  matter. 
Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

76^,  Touching  the  serjeanties,  they  say  that  William  de 
Welleslabe  holds  the  whole  bailiwick  of  Somerset  on  the  east 
of  the  Peret  in  fee  of  the  King  and  renders  annually  to  the 
King  one  sparrowhawk  or  4J. 

768.  The  Abbot  of  Keynsham  does  not  come ;  John  Bratache, 
Thomas  de  Hautevill,  Henry  Dowaddon',  Robert  de  Sancta 
Cruce,  and  Adam  de  Grenevill'  do  not  come,  etc.  Therefore 
[they  are  in]  mercy. 


The  Hundred  of  Wynterstok'^  comes  by  twelve. 

769.  The  house  of  Sybil  Hub[er]t  was  burned  at  Worspringe, 
and  Sybil  was  burned  in  it.  Walter  son  of  Matilda,  who  first 
discovered  {perpendit)  the  fire,  comes,  and  is  not  suspected,  nor 
is  any  one  else.  It  was  testified  that  the  house  was  burned  by 
misadventure.     Therefore  [judgment]  misadventure.* 

770.  Richard  Sarii  killed  Robert  de  la  Wye,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  not  in 
tithing,   but  he   was  harboured   in  the  vill  of  Wurth*  without 

*  Winterstoke. 

'  •*  Inf^rt^ "  is  written  in  the  margin,  but  no  **  murdrum^'  as  usual  in  such  cases. 


SOMERSETSriiRE   PLEAS.  233 


frankpledge.     Therefore  the  township  is  in  mercy.     He  had  no 
chattels. 

771.  Alice  de  Lacy  killed  Christiana  RufTa  and  burned  her 
house,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  her  be  exacted  and  waived.  Her 
chattels  were  [worth]  2J.,  for  which  Ivel  de  Waletorta,  the 
sheriff,  must  answer.  The  township  of  Northton'  harboured 
Alice  after  the  deed.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  And  the  twelve 
jurors  falsely  presented  one  Walter  the  Parson  as  the  finder, 
and  the  coroners  testify  that  one  William  le  Wick'  of  Northon 
was  the  first  finder.  Therefore  the  jury  is  in  mercy  for  its  false 
presentation.  And  William  the  messer  {messariiis^),  accused 
of  the  death  of  the  said  Christiana,  comes  and  defends  the 
whole,  etc.,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  And  twelve 
jurors  and  four  neighbouring  townships  come  and  say  upon 
their  oaths  that  he  is  not  guilty.     Therefore  he  is  quit  thereof. 

772.  Ranulph  Cyssor  of  la  Sute  of  Wynescumbe  was  found 
killed  in  la  Svete  of  Wyne.scumbe.  William  Bal,  accused  of 
that  death,  comes  and  defends  the  whole,  etc.,  and  puts  himself 
upon  the  country.  And  twelve  jurors  and  the  four  neighbour- 
ing townships  come  and  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.  There- 
fore [he  is]  quit.  And  Ralph  Ruffus,  the  first  finder,  comes,  and 
is  not  suspected.  It  is  not  known  who  killed  him.  No 
Englishry  [is  presented],  therefore  murder.  And  the  township 
of  Cumptun*  did  not  make  pursuit.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

773.  Roger  son  of  Jul*  wounded  Martin  de  Fonte  so  that 
after  a  fortnight  (post  quindenam)  he  died  thereof.     [Roger]  fled. 

*  This  word  is  variously  rendered  by  glossaries,  as  "  mower,"  **  reaper,"  "  farm 
bailiff."  Lambarde,  in  a  note  in  Rawl.  MSS.,  B.  471,  at  Oxford,  quoted  in  the 
Introduction  to  "Walter  of  Henley,"  ed.  Lamond,  p.  xxxvj.,  says  that  a  messer  was 
*  *  an  overseer  of  husbandrie. "  See  also  *  *  Memorandum  quod  omtus  predUti^  qui  tenent 
tenementa  cum  dimidia  virgata  terra  non  portabunt  officium  prapositi  vel  ballivi  sed 
erit  messor,  Angitce  tethinginan^^  \  Extent,  printed  in  Scropes  **  Hist,  of  Castle 
Combe,"  p.  214,  quoted  in  the  above  book,  p.  163.  See  also  **  Promptoriuro 
Parvulorum  "  (Camd.  Soc.),  subtit,  "  Heyward,"  p.  234  :  "a  keeper  of  the  cattle  in 
the  common  field  who  prevented  trespass  on  the  cultivated  ground.  Ly  messiers  ad 
les  chaumps  en  cure."  Bp.  Kennett  observes  that  there  were  two  kinds  of  ageliarii, 
the  common  herd-ward  of  a  town  or  village,  called  bubulcus,  who  overlooked  the 
common  herd  and  kept  it  within  bounds,  and  the  hayward  of  the  lord  of  the  manor, 
or  religious  house,  who  was  regularly  sworn  at  the  court,  took  care  of  the  tillage,  paid 
the  labourers,  and  looked  after  trespasses  and  amercements.  He  was  termed  the 
fields-man  or  tilhing-man,  and  in  1425  his  wages  were  a  noble."  {lb,)  Does  not 
hiyward,  not  herdward,  mean  hedgeward,  from  hny,  a  hedge,  and  that  whether  or 
not  he  had  other  duties  at  times  ?  See  as  to  the  duties  of  a  hayward,  **  Seneschaurie" 
in  •*  Walter  of  Henley."  It  is  perhaps  better  to  use  in  this  place  the  neutral  term 
**  messer,"  which  is  the  word  used  in  the  transUtioD  of  **  Waller  of  Henley." 

2    11 


234  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Robert  Patrik  of  Hutton.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
The  township  of  Hutton  did  not  make  pursuit.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  Roger  had  no  chattels.  Alice  wife  of  the  said  Martin, 
who  appealed  Roger  for  the  death  of  her  husband,  did  not 
prosecute  beyond  one  county  [court].  Therefore  she  and  her 
pledges  arc  in  mercy,  but  because  Alice  is  a  pauper  her  amerce- 
ment is  pardoned.  Let  her  pledges  be  amerced,  to  wit 
Thomas  le  Cran  of  Hutton  and  William  le  Maier  of  the  same. 


Memb.  14. 

The  Hundred  of  Wynterstok' — continued. 

774-  Richard  Passy  was  found  drowned  in  a  certain  ditch 
in  Banewell,  called  Lunesthef.  No  one  is  suspected.  No 
Englishry,  therefore  murder  on  Banewell. 

775.  Reginald  the  Clerk  of  Harpetre  fell  from  his  horse  so 
that  he  died.  No  one  is  suspected  thereof.  Judgment,  mis- 
adventure. The  price  of  the  horse  is  3^.,  for  which  the  afore- 
said sheriff  must  answer.* 

776,  Unknown  malefactors  burgled  {burgaverunt)  the  house 
of  Victor  de  la  Hale  and  bound  Victor,  and  likewise  Emeburga 
his  wife  and  Robert  his  son.  Victor  does  not  come,  and  he 
was  attached  by  Henry  de  Oterige  and  Theobald  de  la  Stane 
of  Wynescumbe.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  And  Eme- 
burga comes.     The  others  are  dead.* 

TTJ.  Henry  de  Cumpton*  is  suspected  of  the  death  of 
Richard  son  of  Gilbert,  who  was  killed  in  the  hundred  of 
Weir.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  had 
no  chattels.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Geoffry  de  Duneheved 
of  Cumpton*.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  And  Ralph  de 
Brecton,  attached  for  that  deed,  does  not  come.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges,  to  wit,  Henry  Seward  of  Cumpton'  and 
Geoffry  Dunheved  of  the  same,  are  in  mercy.    Afterwards  it  is 

^  The  horse  is  the  *'  bane  "  or  the  slayer  (Bract.,  fo.  116),  and  as  a  deodand  its 
value  must  be  devoted  to  some  pious  use.  "  In  the  thirteenth  century  the  commoa 
practice  was  that  the  thing  itself  was  delivered  to  the  men  of  the  township  in  whote 
territory  the  death  occurred,  and  they  had  to  accoimt  for  its  value  to  the  royal  officers " 
(**  iiist.  of  Eng.  Law,"  Vol.  ii,  p.  471).  Sometimes  the  justices  named  the  purpose 
to  which  it  was  to  be  applied. 

'^  This  statement  is  probably  a  posttcript. 


<r 


SOMtRSETSHIKE   PLEAS.  235 

testified  that  Ralph  is  sick,  and  the  jurors  say  that  he  is  not 
guilty. 

yj^.  Touching  suits  withheld,  they  say  that  the  Prior  of 
Saint  Swithun  of  Wynton'  withdrew  his  land  of  Bledun'  from  suit 
to  the  hundred  [court]  to  which  he  formerly  was  wont  to  do  suit 
Therefore  it  must  be  discussed.  Afterwards  the  steward  of  the 
Prior  comes  and  says  that  the  Prior  is  quit  of  that  suit  by  the 
charter  of  our  lord  the  King  which  he  has. 

779.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Henry  Engaine, 
Nicholas  de  Boleviir,  Thomas  de  Bello  Campo,  and  Henry  Huse 
did  not  come  on  the  first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

780.  Brother  Gregory  of  la  Houme  and  Robert  his  brother, 
accused  of  larceny,  withdrew  themselves,  and  they  are  suspected 
of  larceny  (de  latrocinio).  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  Brother  Gregory  was  not  in  tithing,  nor  was  his 
brother,  because  they  were  lay  brothers  of  Priory  of  la  Houme, 
and  because  the  Prior  has  them  not  to  right,  to  judgment  on 
the  Prior.* 

781.  Unknown  malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Robert 
Peregrine  of  Blakedon.  It  is  not  known  who  the  malefactors 
were.  The  jury  concealed  that  matter.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Bledon*  comes  by  six. 

782.  They  say  nothing  that  should  not  be  said  \i,e,  presented] 
before,  [/>.  by  the  jury  of  the  hundred.] 

The  Hundred  of  Ceddre*  comes  by  twelve. 

783.  Walter  Harald'  was  wounded  in  his  house  at  Ceddre 
by  unknown  malefactors.  The  jurors  of  Ceddre  and  of  Wynter- 
stoke  say  upon  their  oaths,  that  they  know  that  men  of  Alan 
La  Sutche  killed  him  by  the  order  of  Alan  himself,  but  they  do 
not  know  who  the  men  were. 

784.  Malefactors  killed  Roger  son  of  Palmer  and  Agnes 
his  wife,  and  Joan  and  Isabella  their  daughters  in  his  house  at 
Stokes.  Alice,  Roger's  mother,  the  first  finder,  comes,  and  is 
not  suspected.  Englishry  was  well  presented.  John  Black 
{Niger)  of  la  Radeclive,  accused  of  that  death,  fled,  and  was 

>  The  Prior  was  bound  to  produce  all  of  his  household  or  moinpast. 
'  Cheddar. 


-■  VrRSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


■     ^.: :  C'f  William,  Roj;ers  father.     He  had 

-  :•:  .-.  tithing.     And  inasmuch  as  the  jurors 

-,    \r.^.>  a  dweller  (tnamtis)  at  la  Radeclive 

•■:  wa^  journeying  (ithitraus)  and  was  not 

f^iTcfore  they  circ  in  mercy.     And  Henr\' 

>   -..^:■•ected  of  the   said    death,   comes  and 

.--/.puts  himself  upon  the  country.     The 

^  r.^t  guilty.     Afterwards  it  is  proved  that 

■    ...Sodc   at    Stokes   Gittard   after   he   stole 

^    ..thor.     Therefore  the  township  of  Stokes 

■crcas  the  coroners  of  the  county  record 

:.■  [court]  before  John    was  outlawed   was 

;,  •  ■  and  thus  they  injured  the  said  William, 

:o    death    of  his  son,  therefore  to  judg- 


•  ■•  .^ 


^Cs.  V 


•:   .;nJ  Walter  de   Stoke  entered   the  house 

,:"  Draycote,  by  night,  and  carried  off  the 

:!uMV.     Shortly  afterwards  they  were  taken 

vjndrcd  of  Ceddre,  and  they  were  hanged 

,-  >.::ne  court.     The  Bishop  of  Bath  had  their 

::.'.     Adam  Cute  and  Walter  Cute,  his  son, 

.:  :ij:  with  Klyas,  come  and  defend  everything, 

.^    -^-v  otc,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  are  not 

:*..>r  of  associating  {dc  rcc'  ficc  dc  soc*)  with 

rherefore  they  are  quit.     Ralph  Cute,  son 

•    -.vNi  lo  the  church  of  Axebridge  and  confessed 

...•-  ;;icd  the  realm.     His  chattels  were  [worth] 

■.V  x-hest  {una  area)  and  a  cow,  for  which  chattels 

-.  :^    .r'<wor  to  the  extent  of  6d.     The  Bishop  had 

.  M.    Nvause  the  township  of  Stokes  Giffard  con- 

.  it  is  in  mercy.     Afterwards  it  is  testified  that 

.     '  -^i  ::od  to  the  church  of  Ywelaund  {or  perhaps 

•1.   :""'.onL*e  escaped.    Therefore  to  judgment  for  the 

.'     ..  :>.or  inquiry  be  made  by  the  liberty  of  Glaston'. 

x,v  .".aI  lliat  matter.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

X  v'-.;*.j:  purprcstures,  they  say  that  William  Galopin 

'  7k\  aho  <>f  the  moor  of  our  lord  the  King  in  Ceddre. 

^,-  jv  in  mercy.      Afterwards  it  is  testified   that  the 

Rsih  had  that  moor  in   fee  of  our  lord   the  King. 

n,^  amercement. 

TK  u>i:.»l  meetings  of  the  county  court  were  monthly. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  237 

787.  The  jurors  present  that  the  Abbot  of  Glaston  broke  three 
fisheries  {/regit  tres  piscar^)  in  the  water  between  Glaston'  and 
Radeclive,  so  that  he  made  them  wider  at  the  entrance  and 
outfall  than  they  were  wont  to  be  before.  And  this  he  did  by 
his  boats  {naves  suas).     Therefore  it  must  be  discussed. 

7^?t,  Geoffry  Ruffus,  David  Strapye,  William  Spileman, 
Daniel  de  Cranmer,  and  Walter  Puleyn^  are  suspected  of 
larceny,  and  have  fled.  Let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
Geoffry  was  in  the  tithing  of  Simon  Mathew  in  Ceddre. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels  los,  Richard  parson 
of  the  church  of  Ceddre  had  them,  and  is  dead.  Therefore 
nothing.  David  was  in  the  same  tithing,  and  had  no  chattels; 
William  was  in  the  same  tithing,  and  had  no  chattels.  Daniel 
was  in  the  tithing  of  Adam  Cromer  of  Ceddre.  Therefore  it 
is  in  mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  Walter  Puleyn  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Robert  Dolle.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  had  no 
chattels. 

789.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Robert  de  Galemore 
did  not  come  on  the  first  day.     Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 


Meuib,  14^. 

The  Borough  of  Axebrige  comes  by  twelve 

790.  And  says  nothing  that  should  not  be  said  [/>.  presented] 
before  \i.e.  by  the  jury  of  the  hundred]  except  that  John  de  Fonte 
has  sold  wine  contrary  to  the  assize.  Therefore  he  is  in  mdrcy. 
They  also  say  that  Martin  Gorewy  has  sold  wine  contrary  to 
the  assize.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  And  whereas  the  twelve 
jurors-  concealed  that  [matter],  therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

791.  Walter  de  Lange,  indicted  for  harbouring  thieves,  comes 
and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors 
say  that  he  is  not  guilty  ;  therefore  he  is  quit  thereof,  because  it 
[the  indictment]  was  inspired  by  the  hate  which  Henry  de 
Erlcgh  felt  towards  him  for  his,  Henry's,  brother's  sake  by  reason 
of  a  certain  pasture. 

The  Manor  of  Bagewurth'  comes  by  four 

792.  And  says  nothing  that  should  not  be  said  before. 

*  See  No.  102 1,  infra,  '  Of  the  hundred. 


238  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

The  Street^  {vicus)  of  la  Radeclive,  which  is  of 

THE  Suburb  of  Bristoll'. 

793.  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Adam  Patok,  fell  from  a 
certain  window  so  that  she  died.  No  one  is  suspected  thereof 
Judgment,  misadventure.  The  twelve  jurors  have  presented  no 
finder.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

794.  Matilda  de  Exon  appealed  William  le  Wyld  that  by 
force  he  deflowered  her,  and  now  she  comes  and  sues  against 
him.  William  does  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Peter  le 
Cornwall,  Benedict  le  Taynturel,  Richard  le  Kamber,*  Richard 
de  Bradestrete,  William  le  Strogain  in  {sic)  Bristoll*,  and  Maurice 
le  Blund.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  The  jurors  testify  that  he 
is  guilty.  Therefore  it  is  said  that  Matilda  may  sue  against  him 
in  the  county  [court]  if  she  wishes  until  he  be  outlawed. 

795.  Nicholas  de  Cantuar'  and  Richard  of  the  same  killed 
Walter  the  weaver  (Tixtorem)  in  the  borough  of  Bristoll*. 
Nicholas  fled  to  the  church  of  the  Hospital  of  St.  John,  and 
Richard  fled  to  the  church  of  St.  Thomas.  Both  confessed 
the  deed,  and  abjured  the  realm.  They  were  harboured  in 
the  street  of  la  Radeclive,  without  tithing  and  without  custody. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy,  to  wit,  la  Radeclive.  Nicholas's  chattels 
2j.,  Richard's  6^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff*  must  answer. 

796.  Amice,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  the  Fuller,  had 
the  falling  sickness  (jnorbtwi  caducuni).  She  fell  dead  in  the 
house  of  Clarice,  who  was  the  wife  of  Nicholas  le  Kambere. 
No  one  is  suspected  thereof  Judgment,  misadventure.  The 
jurors  have  not  presented  any  finder  on  the  roll,  and  it  is  testified 
that  other  men  were  in  that  house,  and  because  they  were  not 
attached,  William  Gape,  bailiff"  of  Thomas  de  Berkeclaye  of  la 
Radeclive,  and  the  coroners,*  are  in  mercy.  To  judgment  on 
Thomas  de  Berkelaye,  whose  bailiff"  William  is. 

*  The  use  of  the  word  vicus  in  this  roll  is  confined  to  Redcliffe.  "What  is  a  vicus  f 
Prof.  Maitland  in  his  most  recent  work  says  :  •*  Suppose  for  a  moment  that  in  England 
there  were  many  villages  full  of  free  landholders :  what  should  they  be  called  in 
Latin?  They  should,  it  is  replied,  be  called  vict;  and  they  should  not  be  called  wVAr, 
for  vi//a  is  an  estate.  .  .  .  The  zn/la  is  an  unit  in  a  system  of  property  law,  and, 
if  your  village  is  not  also  an  estate,  a  prcudium^  then  you  should  call  it  vicus^  not 
villa.  ...  It  is  often  used  to  distinguish  a  hamlet  or  small  cluster  of  houses  separate 
from  the  main  village."  **  Domesday  Book  and  Beyond,"  p.  333,  and  note,  in  the 
thirteenth  century  **  street "  is  perhaps  a  safer  rendering. 

^  Quare^  is  this  man  a  "  Cambrier"  ?    See  Ducange,  sub-tit.  "  Hospts,''^ 
•'*  In    1221   there  seems  to  have  been   but  one  coroner  for   Redcliffe:    " /j/» 
rctnancnt  coroiuUons  in  Bristollia  Michael  Bohulk  ct  T%omas  Michel  in  Radcclivt  ef 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


339 


797.  Henry  dc  Sanford  fled  to  the  Hospital  of  St.  John  and 
confessed  the  theft  of  two  fish  called  hake.  He  abjured  the 
realm,  and  therefore  to  judgment  on  the  coroners.' 

798.  Two  horses  were  lied  to  the  p\\\ory  {ad pilloriuiii)  in  the 
street  which  is  of  the  Templars  (/'«  vico  qui  est  Teinplarioriins). 
They  broke  their  halters  {pannos),  and  crushed  a  certain  boy  to 
death.  The  bailiffs  and  coroners  of  la  Radeclivc  dared  not 
attach  the  horses  or  the  pillory  which  fell  on  the  boy,  because  of 
the  Templars.  Therefore  to  judgment.  And  it  is  testified  that 
the  horses  are  in  custody  of  the  Templars.  Price  of  the  horses, 
loj.,  for  which  the  Templars  must  answer ;  price  of  the  pillory, 
2J.,  for  which  the  Templars  [must  answer].  And  be  it  known 
that  the  men  of  the  Templars  did  not  come  before  the  justices 
to  answer  for  anything,  nor  would  the  Templars  themselves 
allow  any  bailiff  of  Rristotl"  to  enter  their  land  to  make  any 
attachment.  Therefore  to  judgment.  Afterwards  the  Templars 
paid  I2J.,  which  the  sheriff  received,  and  for  which  he  must 
account."' 

799.  Walter  de  Marefeld  was  attached  upon  the  accusation 
{dictamentuiii)  of  Walter  de  Brokebir',  a  thief,  who  was  hanged  at 
Bristoll.  Afterwards  Walter  became  approver,  and  was  taken 
to  Yvclcestr'  and  delivered  to  the  bailiffs  of  Herbert  son  of 
Matthew,  who  was  then  high  sheriff  {vtcecoiiies  capitalis).  It  is 
not  known  what  became  [of  him].  Therefore  let  full  inquiry 
be  made.  Walter's  chattels,  %d.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

800.  Luke  de  Wodeford'  and  Mabel  la  Bissop  were  taken 

Rggtrta  Fellarde  el  IVUliImus  h  TaiHur  ultra  ponlem  "  ("  Pleas  of  the  Ctown  for 
the  County  of  Gloucester,"  Miiidiinil,  p.  117);  bul  in  this  roll  wc  have  two.  See 
post.  No.  807. 

'  It  does  not  appear  from  the  entry  why  ihe  coroners  were  in  default.  Ferha[>s 
there  was  some  neglect  la  their  attendance  lo  take  the  liigitive's  abjuration. 

'  The  Templars  of  Bristol  Seem  to  have  lieen  troublesome  people.  In  the  rolls  of 
the  Gloucestershire  Eyre  (5  Hen.  III.,  a.d.  123|),  edited  by  Prof.  Miitland,  the 
tenaou  of  the  Templars  in  Redcliffe  were  summoned  to  answer,  with  the  burgesse*  of 
the  latter  place.  Tney  did  not  come  on  the  first  day,  and  were  therefore  held  to  t>e  in 
meicjr.  They  appear  to  have  claimed  to  answer  by  ihemselves  and  not  with  the 
bDi^:esse£;  but  it  was  shown  that  ih^  were  accustomed  to  answer  with  others  and 
that  Ihey  ought  to  do  so,  either  in  Bristol  or  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  at  the  will  of 
Ihe  King.  Then  they  said  they  would  not  answer  with  the  others  of  RedclilFe  outside 
the  county  of  Someiset,  but  ihey  admitted  that  when  the  justices  were  in  Somenel 
Uicy  had  refused  to  answer  (p.  116).  Piof.  MaitlanJ  says  that  this  must  haTC  been 
ini»8-i9(p.  155).  We  do  not  seem  to  have  the  record  of  that  eyre.  Inihepresent 
case  we  do  not  find  a  record  of  the  judgment,  if  any,  passed  upon  Ihem  ;  but  a  msrginal 
note,  "  xijs.  dd',"  shows  thai  the  \a.  paid  10  Ihe  sheriff  represented  the  deoiland. 


^40  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

with  the  theft  (cum  latrocinio)  at  la  Radeclive.  Mabel  was 
hanged.  She  had  no  chattels.  Luke  became  approver,  and  was 
sent  to  Yvelcestr*  and  delivered  to  the  bailiffs  of  Herbert  son 
of  Matthew,  who  was  then  high  sheriff.  Therefore  let  him 
answer  [for  Luke]. 

80 1.  William  de  Schepeton*  and  John  Curmalin  were  strug- 
gling together  (Jiictati  fuerunt  siviut)  in  the  house  of  Elyas 
Cuch',  and  William  threw  John  on  the  ground,  so  that  on  the 
third  day  he  died.  The  jurors  testify  that  John  was  so  hurt  by 
that  fall  that  he  died  thereof.  Therefore  let  William  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  He  was  not  in  tithing,  and  had  no  chattels, 
because  he  was  a  stranger  (extraneus  fuit)} 

802.  Richard  the  fisherman  was  drowned  from  a  certain 
boat  in  the  Avon  {aqua  de  Avene),  No  one  is  suspected  thereof. 
Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  boat,  5^.,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  answer. 

803.  Simon  de  Bristelton'  was  scalded  {scatalizatus  fuit)  in  a 
certain  cauldron  {caudera)  so  that  he  died.  No  one  is  suspected 
thereof.  Price  of  the  lead  \  mark,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer.     No  Englishry.     Therefore  murder. 

804.  John  Scrogaine  struck  Robert  de  Cumba  with  a  certain 
knife  {Knipuld)  in  the  belly,  and  straightway  fled  to  the  church 
of  St.  John  in  Bedemenistr',  confessed  the  deed,  and  abjured  the 
realm.  He  was  dweller  in  the  vill  of  Bristoir  with  his  mother. 
It  must  be  discussed.  And  be  it  known  that  the  coroners  gave 
him  the  port  of  Dover.*     This  must  be  discussed. 

805.  John  Levine  hanged  himself  in  his  house  in  La  Rade- 

*  Observe  that  nothing  is  said  as  to  whether  the  homicide  was  a  misadventure 
or  otherwise.  John  did  not  face  the  judges,  and  he  is  to  be  outlawed,  lie  might 
have  obtained  a  writ  to  the  sherifT  or  coroners  to  hold  an  inquest  whether  his  act  was 
felonious  or  not,  or  the  justices  might  themselves  have  made  an  inquest,  for  this  was 
l)cfore  the  Statute  of  Gloucester.  Even  had  it  been  misadventure  he  would  have 
needed  the  royal  pardon  to  re-habilitate  him.  I  prefer  to  use  the  Mrider  term 
**  struggling  **  rather  than  **  wrestling,"  which  suggests  sport  rather  than  anger.  By 
the  Statute  of  Gloucester  (6  Edw.  I. )  writs  of  inquest  were  to  be  no  longer  issued,  but 
the  man  was  to  be  kept  in  prison  until  the  next  coming  of  the  justices,  when  he  had  to 
put  himself  upon  the  country  ;  and  if  it  were  found  that  the  killing  was  done  in  self- 
defence,  or  by  misadventure,  the  justices  were  to  report  to  the  King,  who  could  pardon, 
and  did  apparently  as  a  matter  of  course. 

^  As  the  port  from  which  he  was  to  leave  the  realm.  Bracton  says  (fo.  135b)  that 
the  fugitive  selected  the  port  himself.  Dr.  Gross  (**  Coroners*  Rolls,"  Seld.  Soc, 
p.  9,  note  2)  says  that  since  the  latter  part  of  the  reign  of  Edward  I.  the  coroners 
assigned  the  port.  This  case  seems  to  anticipate  the  later  practice,  and  perhaps  this 
was  whv  the  justices  reserved  the  matter  tor  further  discussion. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  24 1 


clive.     Judgment,  felonia  de  se  ipso.    His  chattels,  2s.  6^/.,  for 
which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

806.  Sellers  of  cloth  at  Raddeclive  against  the  assize: — Adam 
Halfurling',  Nicholas  Sachel,  William  de  Flexlegh',  Peter  Corub', 
Ralph  de  Konintre,  Roger  de  Flexlegh,  William  Ruffus,  Robert 
son  of  the  priest,  John  Gilbert,  Fulk  Gallinarius,  Thomas  le 
Teller,  Machtill*  Estmer,  Thomas  Young  {Juvents)^  Elias  de 
Haegeham,  Alimona  (?)  de  Parys,  Walter  Blund  {Blundus\ 
Mary  de  Devere,  Gilbert  Norens,  Ralph  de  Kent,  Walter  le 
Monec,  the  relict  of  Thomas  Filturar',  Richard  Sakel,  Richard 
the  clerk,  Roger  the  clerk,  Ralph  Tinctor,  Henry  Blakeman, 
Richard  Boydin,  Alfred  {Alvredus)  de  Aiston',  Susanna,  William 
le  Gappe,  Walter  de  Beministr*,  Thomas  Nuttelune,  Peter  de 
Dorset,  Walter  de  Chepstowe,  John  le  Franceis,  Adam  de 
Wedmer*,  Walter  {Tinctor),  Robert  Wefrich,  John  Brun,  the 
relict  of  Alexander  le  Skot,  Richard  Bernard,  and  David  la 
Warre  have  sold  cloths  against  the  assize.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy. 

807.  These  remain  as  coroners,  to  wit,  Elyas  Estmere  and 
John  le  Irreyes. 

808.  The  names  of  those  who  dwell  on  the  fee  of  the  church 
of  la  Raddeclive : — John  Thorban,  Geoffry  son  of  Alexander 
Ruffus,  the  relict  of  Herindus  Cut,  and  Robert  Lunel. 

Memb.  15. 

The  Hundred  of  Bedministr'  comes  by  twelve. 

809.  Elyas  le  Brun  was  wounded  at  Bristoll'  so  that  he 
quickly  died.  It  is  not  known  who  wounded  him,  and  he  was 
buried  without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  the  township 
of  Bedemenstr'  is  in  mercy.  Alice  wife  of  Elyas,  and  John 
Pinzun  his  servant,  were  attached  for  this.  The  jury  concealed 
it.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

810.  Agnes,  the  servant  of  Lucy  Lampreye,  having  the  falling 
sickness,  fell  into  a  certain  tun  (tina)  full  of  grute^  (or  crute) 
so  that  she  was  scalded  {scatulizata  fuit).  Judgment,  misad- 
venture. The  price  of  the  tun,  3^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

^  The  initial  letter  of  this  word  is  a  capital  letter.  The  capital  G  and  capital  C 
are  exceedingly  alike.  I  suggest  that  the  explanation  of  the  term  may  be  found  in 
Ducange,  Glos. ,  sub.  tit.  "  Grutum  =  teguminis  sptcits,  condimentum  cetezisia,*^  in  fact 
that  brewing  was  in  progress. 

2    I 


242  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

8 1 1.  Thomas  de  Fibelc  appealed  Ralph  the  tailor  of  wounds, 
and  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute, 
namely,  William  Trunket  of  Draycote,  and  John  Thiral  of  the 
same,  are  in  mercy.  Likewise  Ralph  does  not  come.  He  was 
attached  by  Reginald  de  Legge  and  Thomas  Hayrun  of  the 
same.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  And  because  it  is  testified 
that  they  are  agreed,  let  both  be  taken.  Afterwards  Ralph 
comes,  and  because  it  is  testified  that  they  are  agreed,  let  him 
be  in  custody.  Afterwards  Thomas  de  Fibele  comes  and  makes 
fine  for  his  amercement  for  20s,,  by  pledge  of  William  de  Aston, 
Walter  de  Stihelnaye  and  Thomas  Heyrun*. 

812.  The  same  Ralph  the  tailor  appealed  the  aforesaid 
Thomas  and  Robert  his  man,  George  de  Fubele,  and  John  de 
Cedinton  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of  wounds. 
Ralph  now  comes  and  pursues  his  appeal.  George  and  the 
others  do  not  come  ;  therefore  they  and  their  pledges  are  in 
mercy.  George  was  attached  by  Bartholomew  de  Euenberg', 
and  his  other  pledge  is  dead.  The  same  George  mainprised 
all  the  others.  Upon  this  comes  Adam  de  Eston*  and  proffers 
a  writ  of  our  lord  the  King  of  protection  for  the  aforesaid 
George  for  that  he  is  in  parts  beyond  the  sea  with  him.  There- 
fore it  must  be  discussed.  Afterwards  Ralph  the  tailor  came 
and  made  fine  for  40^.  by  pledge  of  William  de  Ayston',  Adam 
de  Ayston,  Walter  de  Selewaye,  and  Thomas  Hayrun.^ 

813.  A  certain  Geoffry,  a  preaching  friar  {^f rater  predicator)^ 
was  drowned  in  the  water  of  Bisscopewurth*,  and  was  buried 
without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  the  township  is  in 
mercy.  Richard  Queynterel,  serjeant  of  the  hundred,  was  then 
present,  and  did  not  attach  the  first  finder.  Therefore  he  is  in 
mercy.     No  Englishry.     Therefore  murder. 

814.  Martin  the  shepherd  was  found  killed  at  his  fold.  It  is 
not  known  who  killed  him.  No  Englishry.  Therefore  murder. 
Adam  de  la  Pille,  Robert  de  la  Pille,  and  Robert  Scorie  falsely 
presented  Englishr>\  Therefore  let  them  be  in  custody.  Richard 
de  Langeford,  then  sheriff,  when  he  made  inquest  on  that  death 
took  100^.  from  the  tithing  because  he  [Martin]  was  without 
tithing,  and  because  the  men  of  that  tithing  came  in  insufficient 
number  to  the  inquest.  And  moreover  he  took  fiom  Adam 
Thedhayrd  i  mark,  and  took  him  at  Bedeministr*  and  put  upon 

^  This  fine  was  probably  paid  to  obtain  his  release  from  the  custody  ordered  in 
the  preceding  case. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  243 

him  that  he  had  killed  his  wife.  And  Richard  de  Langeford 
comes  and  fully  confesses  that  he  took  the  aforesaid  [Adam] 
as  is  said.  Therefore  to  judgment  upon  him.  William  Alverede, 
the  first  finder,  comes  and  is  not  suspected.  Afterwards  Adam 
de  la  Pille  and  the  others  come  and  make  fine  for  I  mark  by 
pledge  of  Roger  the  reeve  and  Martin  son  of  Haldgar. 

815.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Maurice  de  Berkele 
and  William  de  Bello  Monte  did  not  come  on  the  first  day. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Well*^  comes  by  twelve. 

816.  Emma  wife  of  Walter  de  Gardino  and  Robert  her  son 
were  crushed  to  death  by  a  certain  wall  which  fell  upon  them. 
No  Englishry :  therefore  murder.  And  the  twelve  jurors  falsely 
presented  Englishry  and  likewise  a  false  finder.  Therefore  all 
are  in  mercy. 

817.  Henry  servant  of  Ralph  de  Britton  killed  Gilbert  son 
of  Richard  Scuringe,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  His  tithing  was  elsewhere,  in  the  Hundred  of 
Winterstok\  The  jurors  testify  that  William  son  of  Ralph  de 
Britton  commanded  Henry  that  he  should  kill  the  said  Gilbert, 
wherefore  he  [William]  was  delivered  to  the  Bishop  of  Bath. 
It  is  not  known  what  the  Bishop  did  therein  ;  and  because  it  is 
uncertain  whether  he  was  punished  for  that  transgression,  let  him 
be  exacted  and  outlawed. 

818.  Concerning  purprestures,  they  say  that  the  Abbot  of 
Glaston  broke  fisheries  {/regit piscarias)  of  our  lord  the  King  in 
the  water  of  the  Axe,  since  the  death  of  the  Bishop  of  Bath. 
Therefore  it  must  be  discussed. 

819.  Walter  the  writer  {scriptor\  Warine  de  Bristoll,  John 
Tyrcl,  and  three  other  stranger  thieves,  fled  to  the  church  of 
Chirchehuir-  after  they  had  robbed  William  de  Churchehill*, 
and  abjured  the  realm.  It  is  not  known  who  they  were,  but 
let  full  inquiry  be  made  concerning  John  Tyrell*  upon  Well*^ 
{super  IVe/f). 

820.  Richard  Young  {Juvenis)  appeals  John  de  Welle  that 
he,  on  Sunday  next  before  the  feast  of  St.  Kalixtus  the  Pope, 
beat  him  and  shamefully  {turpiter)  treated  him  and  imprisoned 

Wells.  «  Churchill. 

^  I  take  it  th|it  the  inquiry  is  put  upon  the  jury  of  the  hundred. 


244  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

-■ 

him  in  his  house  for  two  days.  And  on  this  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  country.  And  because  he  does  not  offer  to  deraign  by 
his  body,  the  appeal  is  null.  Let  inquiry  be  made.  The  jurors 
testify  that  John  is  not  guilty,  but  that  Richard*  beat  him 
[John]  and  shamefully  treated  him.  Therefore  John  is  quit, 
and  Richard  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody.  Afterwards 
Richard  comes  and  makes  fine  for  20s.  by  pledge  of  Osbert  the 
reeve  of  Mellens,  Robert  le  Prest  of  the  same,  Osbert  de  Crofta 
of  the  same,  and  John  Uppehill'  of  the  same. 

821.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Straton* 
did  not  come  on  the  first  day,  so  he  is  in  mercy.  They  say  that 
Agatha  de  Corescumbe  and  Geoffry  de  Dunerre  did  not  come  on 
the  first  day  ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

822.  John  the  hayward,  accused  of  larceny,  came  and 
defended  everything,  etc.,  and  put  himself  upon  the  country 
and  upon  the  four  nearest  vills  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  say 
that  he  is  a  thief     Therefore,  etc' 

823.  Ralph  Chobbe  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled. 
Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Richard  Kippinge  in  Dultingcote.*  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
His  chattels  were  [worth]  34.^.  6r/.,  for  which  Richard  de  Dulting- 
cote  the  tithingman  must  answer. 

824.  William  and  Cicely  de  W^nchalse  fled  to  the  church  of 
Behenhanger,*  confessed  themselves  to  be  thieves,  and  abjured 
the  realm.  They  were  strangers,  and  had  no  chattels.  The  jurors 
concealed  this.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Borough  of  Well  comes  by  twelve. 

825.  Gregory  de  Slunbrige,  clerk,  broke  into  two  coffers  in 
the  house  of  Enyilde  de  Cycestr'.  Afterwards  he  was  degraded 
{degradatiis  fuit)  for  that  deed.  William  Home,  accused  of 
participation  {de  consensu)^  comes  and  is  not  suspected.  There- 
fore he  is  quit. 

826.  Richard  Buschel  and  John  Buschel  were  guests  {pspitali 
fuenmt)  in  the  house  of  William  son  of  Jordan  and  William 

Palmer  in  Well.     Afterwards  they  were  found  killed  on  Mune- 

'  The  roll  has  ^^ predictus  Roherius^^  an  evident  mistake  for  Richard. 
^  Over  this  name  is  written  **  langttidus  «/"  =  he  is  sick. 

^  We  scarcely  need  the  marginal  note  **  susp  "  to  explain  this  laconic  entry  of  the 
judgment. 

*  Dulcot,  a  tithing  of  Wells.  *  Binegar. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  245 

depe.  William  and  William  come  and  defend  that  they  know 
anything  of  the  death  of  them  [Richard  and  John],  and  put 
themselves  upon  the  country.  The  jurors  say  that  they  are  not 
guilty,  so  they  are  quit.' 

Sij.  Three  men  and  four  women,  strangers,  were,  guests  in 
the  house  of  Thomas  Imme  of  Well'.  They  behaved  foolishly 
{stulte  gesserunt\  and  were  attached  and  taken  before  the  hun- 
dred [court].  Two  of  the  women,  against  whom  there  was  no 
suspicion,  nor  upon  whom  was  any  theft  found,  were  quitclaimed 
by  judgment  of  the  hundred.  After  this  the  two  women 
straightway  put  themselves  in  the  church  of  Well*,  confessed 
that  they  were  thieves,  and  before  William  de  Wellesle  and 
without  [presence  of]  the  coroners  abjured  the  realm.  Because 
William  acted  as  deputy  coroner  without  warrant,  he  is  in  mercy. 
And  likewise  the  township  of  Weir  is  in  mercy  because  it 
allowed   them   thus   to   depart 

828.  Concerning  cloths  sold,  they  say  that  Geoffry  de 
Brideport  has  sold  cloths  and  wine  against  the  assize.  Therefore 
he  is  in  mercy.  Likewise  William  Buche  and  Thorstan  de 
Suthover  have  sold  wine  against  the  assize.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy. 

829.  Geoffry  the  carpenter  is  in  mercy  for  his  foolish  speech* 
{stultiloquid), 

Memb.  \$d. 

The  Borough  of  Well' — continued. 

830.  Walter  the  Scot  (5r(7//<f«j),  Roger  Andrew,  and  Nicholas 
Payne,  arrested  for  larceny,  come  and  defend  everything,  and 
put  themselves  upon  the  country.  The  jurors  say  that  they  are 
not  guilty.  Therefore  they  are  quit  And  because  they  were 
brought  before  the  justices  by  the  twelve  jurors,  and  they  [the 
jurors]  did  not  know  their  names,  therefore  to  judgment  on  them 
[the  jurors]. 

The  Hundred  of  Welwe*  comes  by  twelve. 

831.  The  house  of  Richard  de  Durecote  at  Durecote  was 
burned,  and  Richard's  wife  and  son  were  burned  in  that  house. 

'  If  guests  be  seen  to  go  into  a  house  and  are  not  afterwards  seen  alive,  the  owner 
of  the  house,  if  then  at  home,  or  others  of  his  family,  cannot  escape  capital  punish- 
ment unless  discharged  by  verdict  of  the  country  " si justitiarii  ferspexerint  vtritaitm 
ter  p€Uriam  debere  inquiri.''^     (Bract.,  fo.  137b.) 

'  QM<gre,  or  foolish  suit  *  Wellow. 


246  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

No  onq  is  suspected.  Henry  de  Durecote,  the  first  finder,  does 
not  come.  He  was  attached  by  John  de  Lipehet  and  Richard 
de  Chatele.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

832.  A  certain  beggar  woman  was  hurt  to  death  by  a  branch 
of  a  tree  which  fell  upon  her.  The  price  of  the  branch  is  Sd., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Neither  the  sheriff  nor  the 
coroners  made  any  attachment.  Therefore  to  judgment  upon 
them.  And  be  it  known  that  Thomas  de  Cyrencestr*  was  then 
sheriff. 

833.  John  de  la  Cumbe  was  found  drowned  in  the  water  of 
Welwe.  Alditha  his  wife  was  the  first  to  find  him,  and  does  not 
come.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges,  namely,  Roger  de 
Eswelbrig  and  William  le  Kinge  of  the  same,  are  in  mercy.  No 
Englishry.  Therefore  murder.  The  twelve  jurors  presented 
that  he  was  English.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  John  was 
buried  without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  the  township 
of  Foxecote  is  in  mercy. 

834.  Augustine  de  Twyuerton  killed  Alice  his  wife,  and 
straightway  fled.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in 
the  tithing  of  Alwin  de  Twyuerton  in  Twyuerton.  Therefore 
it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  42 j.  6d.,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  answer. 

835.  Malefactors  wounded  William  le  Wylde  outside  the 
vill  of  Welwe,  so  that  after  eight  days  he  died. 

836.  Jul*  daughter  (?  y?/.)  of  Gilbert  de  Cherleton  found  a 
certain  unknown  man  dead.  It  is  not  known  who  killed  him.  No 
Englishry.  Therefore  murder.  A  certain  razor  was  found  near 
the  dead  man,  which  was  delivered  to  Robert  Sleg,  then  tithing- 
man  of  Wodeberg'  and  Segelinge,  so  that  he  should  have  it 
before  the  justices.  Because  he  had  it  not,  he  and  his  tithing  are 
in  mercy. 

837.  Unknown  malefactors  killed  Walter  Cusin  near  the 
wood  of  Writhlington'.  Godfrey  de  la  Ware  is  suspected  of 
that  death.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
Walter  le  Nayr  was  hanged  for  the  death.  Nothing  is  known 
of  the  chattels  or  tithing  of  Godfrey,  because  he  was  journeying, 
and  was  of  the  County  of  Gloucester. 

838.  Edith  daughter  of  William  was  scalded  in  a  certain  tun 
full  of  hot  water.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadven- 
ture.    Price  of  the  tun,  4^^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

839.  Touching  the  evasion  of  thieves,  they  say  that  Adam 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  247 

Wyther  and  William  Ic  Bocher  were  taken  by  Henry  de  Kare- 
viir  and  Nicholas,  Serjeants  of  our  lord  the  King  in  the  hundred 
of  Welvve,  and  they  were  delivered  in  custody  to  the  house^ 
(fuerunt  trad  it  i  in  custodia  in  Cur)  of  Alexander  de  Monte 
Forti,  and  from  that  custody  they  escaped  to  the  church  of 
Wehve,  and  from  the  church  they  escaped  and  fled  into  Wales. 
Therefore  to  judgment  for  those  escapes. 

840.  Nicholas  de  Ingelbache,  arrested  for  larceny,  comes 
and  defends  everything  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  and 
the  four  neighbouring  townships.  The  jurors  say  that  he  is  not 
guilty  ;  therefore  he  is  quit. 

841.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  the  Prior  of  Bath, 
Robert  Gurnay,  Agatha  de  llalesweye,  William  le  Chanu,  John 
Bretache,  Peter  the  cook,^  Thomas  de  Hautevill,  Eustache  de 
Cumbe,  Robert  the  weaver  ( 7)'.r/t?r),  Osbert  de  Nuny,  Alexander 
de  Waviir,  and  William  de  Monte  F^orti  did  not  come  on  the 
first  day.     Therefore  they  arc  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Bednestane^  comes  by  twelve. 

842.  Warin  the  clerk  wounded  Martin  Yllebert  so  that  he 
died.  He  [Warin]  was  taken  by  Ralph  de  W^ellesle  and  Henry 
the  bailiffs  of  Kokerre,  who  delivered  him  to  the  township 
of  Hcrdinton'.  Warin  escaped  from  them.  Therefore  Ralph, 
Henry,  and  the  township  are  in  mercy.  Warin  fled  to  the 
church  of  Hcrdinton*,  and  abjured  the  land.  He  was  not  in 
tithing,  but  he  had  chattels  [worth]  23^.  8r/.,  for  which  the  sheriff" 
must  answer.  And  because  Warin  paused  [fecit  morani]  in  the 
vill  of  Merke^  after  the  deed,  and  they  did  not  take  him  nor 
attach  him,  the  township  of  Merke  is  in  mercy. 

843.  Edith,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  le  Roke,  was 
drowned  in  the  water  of  Huberde  Were.  William  her  husband 
was  present  and  saw  this.  Because  the  township  of  Wedde- 
more  presented  another  finder,  it  is  in  mercy.  No  one  is  sus- 
pected.    Judgment,  misadventure. 

8.|4.  Ernisius  son  of  Agnes  de  la  Wall  was  found  drowned 
in  a  certain  ditch  at  Waubrige.     Agnes  his  mother  first  found 

*  Curia  here  means  the  manor  or  court  house,  I  think. 
-  Over  this  name  is  written  *^ paraliiicus  fsi/' 

^  Bempstone. 

*  Mark. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  FI,EAS. 

him,  and  she  is  dead.  No  Englishry  was  presented.  Therefore, 
murder.  And  because  the  jurors  falsely  presented  Englishiy, 
they  are  in  mercy.  William  lllcbert  untruly  presented  himself 
as  a  kinsman.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of  William 
de  Marisco  and  Robert  Russel.     He  made  fine  for  J  mark. 

545.  Unknown  malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Mathew 
the  chaplain  at  Burnham,  and  killed  Thomas  his  brother,  and 
there  bound  Walter  tlic  clerk,  Robert  Blund  (d/undiwi).  John 
son  of  David,  William  son  of  Mabel,  and  Isabella  daughter  of 
Mathew.  None  of  them  come.  And  because  it  is  testified 
that  the  sheriff  enjoined  the  liberty  of  the  Dean  of  Welts  that 
they  should  attach  them,  and  nothing  was  done  therein  ;  there- 
fore to  judgment  on  the  liberty. 

546.  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  John  Teri,"  and  who  is  dead, 
appealed  William  son  of  William  de  Polet  of  the  death  of  her 
husband.  William  was  suspected  of  that  death,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  not  in 
tithing,  because  he  was  a  free  man.  He  was  of  the  niainpast 
of  the  said  William  his  father.  Therefore  he  [the  father]  is  in 
mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  And  because  the  township  of 
Polet  made  no  pursuit  after  him,  it  is  in  mercy. 

847.  A  certain  thief  Adam  by  name,  stole  cloths  from  the 
house  of  Roger  Helt  of  Were.  He  was  seen,  and  the  hue  being 
raised,  he  fled  to  the  church  of  Were,  confessed  the  theft,  and 
abjured  the  land.  The  township  of  Were  made  no  suit  after 
him  nor  presented  the  matter  to  the  county  [court].  Therefore 
the  township  is  in  mercy. 

848.  Margery  daughter  of  Aline  Wytecote  appealed  Ralph 
the  carter,  Geoffry  Penewine,  and  Walter  de  la  Pe  .  ,  of  the 
peace  and  robbery.  And  she  appealed  William  son  of  Peter  of 
rape.  She  does  not  come,  and  has  no  pledges  beyond  her 
promise  (nisifidem)}  All  the  appealed  come.  The  jurors  testify 
that  they  [the  parties]  have  agreed.  Therefore  let  all  be  in 
custody.  Afterwards  they  all  come  and  make  fine  for  40*-.  by 
pledge  of  Nicholas  de  la  Pele  and  Rannlf  de  Wedmorc. 

849.  Henry  le  Norrcys  of  the  county  of  Stafford  fled  to  the 
church  of  Hywys,  confessed  himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the 
realm.  He  was  not  in  tithing  because  he  was  journeying.  His 
chattels  [were  worth]  63J,,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer, 

'  This  name  is  wrilLeu  ih.is  :   '■  ?ri." 
*  See  note  lo  No.  719,  supra. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  249 


850.  All  the  hundredors  and  all  the  jurors  of  the  manors  of 
Estperet  who  did  not  make     .     .     .^ 

Metnb,  16. 

Hundred  of  Bednestan' — continued. 

851.  Richard  de  Aula  of  Brene,  and  John  and  William  his 
sons,  were  suspected  of  theft  of  three  sheep,  and  fled.  Therefore 
let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  They  were  in  the  tithing 
of  David  de  Breene.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Richard's 
chattels  [were  worth]  40J.  4^.,  for  which  William  Everard  must 
answer,  by  pledge  of  William  de  Cuntevill'  and  Terric*  de 
Burnham. 

852.  Walter  Cobbe  appealed  John  the  serjeant  of  Blakeford 
{servientem  de  Blakeford)  for  that  he,  John,  impounded  {par- 
cavit)  five  oxen,  so  that  by  such  impounding  they  died,  and 
on  this  he  put  himself  upon  the  country.  And  because  that 
appeal  was  null  let  inquiry  be  made  by  the  country  con- 
cerning the  transgression.  The  jurors  testify  that  the  afore* 
said  John  took  the  oxen  and  detained  them  against  gage  and 
pledge,  and  as  such  he  chased  and  beat  them  so  that  they  died. 
Therefore  let  him  be  in  custody.  Afterguards  John  came  and 
made  fine  for  \  mark  by  pledge  of  Robert  Russel  of  Alverington'* 
and  Walter  Cobbe.* 

853.  Richard  de  Cuntevill'  appealed  Nicholas  Eylward  and 
Matilda  his  wife  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and 
robbery.  And  now  Richard  comes  and  sues  against  them. 
Nicholas  and  Matilda  do  not  come.  They  were  attached  by 
Walter  Emeri,  Walter  Tortcmayns,  and  Richard  de  Alver- 
ington.*     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

854.  John  de   Modeslegh'  appealed   the  aforesaid    Nicholas 

'  This  is  an  incomplete  entry. 

3  "'p;Vi"  in  the  original.  »  Allerton. 

*  Walter  was  wrong  in  his  procedure,  but  the  entry  is  not  sufficiently  explicit  to 
show  on  what  ground  his  appeal  failed.  Notwithstanding  the  failure  the  justices 
inquired  into  the  matter,  possibly  because  it  was  put  lorward  as  a  breach  of  the  King's 
peace,  and  as  such  ought  not  to  be  allowed  to  pass  without  remedy,  although  the 
appellor  himself  could  not  proceed,  as  in  the  case  of  the  death  of  an  appellor,  or  »v'here 
he  has  made  default,  or  has  retracted.     (See  Bract.,  fo.  142b,  also  fo.  148b.) 

*  Over  Emeri's  name  is  wriitcn  **^^"  {obiit),  over  the  next  name  ^*ruscr'^  {uescihir), 
and  over  Richard's  *'  uich  ''  {nihii).  The  marginal  note  of  the  fact  of  amercement  is 
struck  out. 

2    K 


250  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

and  Matilda  of  the  peace,  etc.  Now  he  comes  and  sues  against 
them.  They  do  not  come.  They  were  attached  by  the  afore- 
said pledges.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.* 

855.  The  same  Nicholas  Aylward'  appealed  Richard  de 
Cunteviir,  David  Costentin,  Peter  de  Cuntevill',  and  many  others, 
of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King.  He  does  not  come, 
and  he  had  no  pledges  beyond  the  aforenamed.  All  the 
appealed  come,  and  have  not  compromised,  and  are  not  guilty. 
Therefore  all  are  quit.  And  Nicholas  and  his  pledges  are  in 
mercy. 

856.  Geoffry  the  miller  of  Were  appealed  Peter  de  la  Roke 
of  the  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King.  Geoffry  comes 
and  sues  against  him.  Peter  does  not  come,  nor  was  he  attached. 
Therefore,  nothing. 

857.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  John  Dean  of  Wells, 
Robert  Tregoz,  John  Tregoz,  William  de  Marisco,  Thomas  Beau- 
grant,  Thomas  Everard,  Henry  Crok',  Alfred  the  Chamberlain, 
and  Walter  de  Barewurthe  did  not  come  on  the  first  day. 
Therefore  [they  are]  in  mercy.' 

858.  Clarice  wife  of  John  son  of  Richard  appealed  William 
le  Fox  of  Heywik*,  Nicholas  le  Smale,  and  many  others,  to  wit, 
Reginald  Toni  and  John  le  Crane,  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our 
lord  the  King.  Clarice  and  John  her  husband  now  come  and 
sue  against  them.  She  appealed  William  le  Fox  and  Nicholas 
le  Smale  for  that,  on  Sunday  next  before  the  feast  of  St  Martin, 
they  assaulted  her*  and  broke  her  arm,  against  the  peace,  etc. 
She  appealed  Reginald  Toni  and  John  le  Crane  as  accessories 
{de  vi).  And  because  the  appeal  is  null,  let  inquest  be  made  by 
the  country.  The  jurors  testify  that  William  and  Nicholas  broke 
her  arm  and  beat  her,*  as  she  appealed  them.  Therefore  [they 
are]  in  mercy.  Let  them  be  committed  to  gaol.  The  jury  also 
testify  that  John  and  Reginald  are  not  guilty.  Therefore  they 
are  quit,  and  Clarice  and  John  are  in  mercy  for  their  false  appeal. 
Afterwards  come  William  le  Fox  and  Nicholas  le  Smale,  and 
made  fine  for  5  marks,  by  pledge  of  Walter  son  of  Herdig*, 
Reginald  Toni,  Nicholas  de  Cuntevill',  and  John  de  Bednestan*. 

^  Here  again  the  marginal  **  misericcrdie**  it  struck  out. 

^  Over  his  name  is  written  *'  nick."    The  note  of  the  amercement  is  again  struck 

GUI. 

^  Over  the  Dean's  name  is  ultra  ;  over  that  of  John  Tregor  **  1  8"  in  the  service 
of  the  King  ;  and  over  William  de  Mari^co's  name  is  *^hU%  ki" — niAi/  habet, 
^  The  roll  has  **£um'*  here — I  think  by  mistake. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  25 1 


The  Manor  of  Were*  comes  by  six. 

859.  Walter  Dodinge  was  found  drowned  in  a  certain  ditch 
in  the  manor  of  Hunespill*.  Hugh  his  father,  the  first  finder, 
comes,  and  is  not  suspected.  No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 
The  jurors  falsely  presented  Englishry.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  And  John  de  la  Lade  untruly  presented  himself  as  a 
kinsman.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for  ^  mark 
by  pledge  of  William  Dodinge. 

860.  Alice  daughter  of  Robert  Annoceman  was  found 
drowned  in  a  certain  ditch  at  Hunnespile,  and  was  buried 
without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  the  township  of 
Hunnespiir  is  in  mercy.  And  the  fee  of  the  church  of  Hune- 
spiir  did  not  present  the  matter ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

861.  Concerning  minors  (de  vaUctis)  who  ought  to  be  in 
the  custody  of  our  lord  the  King,  they  say  that  William 
Maynel  ought  to  be  in  the  custody  of  our  lord  the  King. 
Herbert  son  of  Matthew  has  his  custody  from  our  lord  the  King, 
and  he  [William]  is  married  to  the  daughter  of  John  le  Estrange. 
His  [William's]  land  is  in  the  manor  of  Hunnespiir,  and  is  worth 
£\o  per  annum. 

862.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Thomas  Everard  is 
infirm  {infirmus  est),  and  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  There- 
fore he  is  in  mercy. 


The  Hundred  of  la  Stane*  comes  by  twelve. 

863.  Richard  de  Moriet  was  killed  by  a  certain  mill  wheel 
Herbert  the  miller  {le  mutter),  the  first  finder,  comes,  and  is  not 
suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  wheel,  2j., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

864.  John  de  Cynnok  appealed  Ralph  de  Cylterne  and 
Elena  his  wife,  Alfred  {Alveredus)  le  King  of  Preston',  and 
Thomas  of  the  same,  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of 
beating  and  wounds,  and  he  does  not  come.  Therefore  let  him 
be  taken,  and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  William  Rugecote 
and  Roger  Pigate.  All  the  appealed  come.  The  jurors  say  that 
they  [the  parties]  are  agreed,  and  that  Alfred  is  guilty,  and  not 
the  others.     Therefore  it  is  considered  that  they  should  be  in 

1  Weare.  •  Stone. 


252  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

custody.^  Afterwards  Ralph  came  and  made  fine  for  himself  and 
his  men  for  5  marks  by  pledge  of  Ralph  de  Meriet,  William 
Fossard,  James  de  Munsorel,  and  William  de  Oreweye. 

865.  Warin  de  Sancto  Edwardo  appealed  Richard  the  chap- 
lain of  Gyvele^  and  Alexander  son  of  Rikelin  of  breach  of  the 
peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  beating.  And  because  the 
appeal  is  null,  let  an  inquest  be  made,  etc.  [/>.,  by  the  country]. 
The  jurors  testify  that  Richard  and  Alexander  are  not  guilty. 
Therefore  they  are  quit.     Let  Warin  be  in  custody. 

866.  Osbert  de  Preston  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  not  in 
tithing,  because  a  free  man.  His  chattels  [were  worth]  5^.  6^/., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  And  be  it  known  that  the 
chattels  were  delivered  to  Adam  de  la  Port  And  because  he  is 
not  ready  with  them,  he  is  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for  J  mark 
by  pledge  of  William  de  Meweye  and  Ralph  de  Wellesle. 

867.  Concerning  serjeanties,  they  say  that  Geoffry  de  Wer- 
miir  and  Margaret  his  wife,  Thomas  de  Crukert  and  Joan  his 
wife.  Henry  de  Milleburn'  and  Cecily  his  wife,  hold  one  hide  of 
land  in  Neweton'  of  our  lord  the  King  by  the  service  of  one  linen 
cloth  (inappe)  of  ten  yards  and  one  silken  cloth^  {tuelP)  of  five 
yards,  and  by  service  of  serjeanty  {per  servicium  seriancie)} 

868.  Concerning  suits,  they  say  that  the  tithing  and  suit  of 
Chilton  has  been  withdrawn  from  the  hundred  [court]  of  la 
Stane  by  William  de  Cantulupo,  since  the  feast  of  St.  Michael  in 
the  25th  year  of  the  reign  of  the  King  who  now  is,  and  they 
know  not  by  what  warrant  The  said  tithing  and  the  said  suit 
of  Chilton*  were  wont  to  answer  to  the  hundred  of  la  Stone  for 
ts,  per  annum  by  custom,  besides  other  perquisites. 

869.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Cante- 
lupo,  Robert  de  Cantu  Lupo,  Lucy  de  Ardern,  John  de  Sancto 
Johanne  of  Balun*,  Robert  de  Say,  John  de  Marisco,  the  Prior 
of  Bradenestok,  Adam  de  Porta,  John  de  Tudenham,  John 
Petevin,  Stephen  de  Astington,  Thomas  de  Cyrnecestr*,  Richard 

'  For  compromising  the  matter  without  leave.  The  order  for  custody  was  merely 
to  put  pressure  u]x)n  the  parties  to  come  in  and  make  their  peace  with  the  King  by 
payment  of  a  fine.  '  Yeovil. 

^  TuaUium  is  often  rendered  as  towel,  but  I  think  that  something  else  must  be 
meant  here.     See  Ducange,  sub  tit.  Toaih'a,  under  head  **  Toatuia.** 

*  It  looks  8S  though  the  three  ladies  were  holding  as  co-heiresses.  But  lands 
held  in  serjeanty  had  been  treated  as  incapable  of  partition,  and  the  eldest  daughter 
could  claim  the  whole. 


SOMERSETSHIRK   PLEAS.  255 

Purgthoo,  Alfred  de  Preston,  Thomas  de  Preston,  Isaac  de 
Kingesbir,  John  the  cook.  Eleanor  de  Ever  .  .  ,  Walter  Chere, 
Colin  Hurri,  and  Dyonis'  de  Oterhampton  did  not  come  on  the 
first  day.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

Hundred  of  la  Stane — continued. 

870.  Concerning  purprestures,  they  say  that  certain  gallows 
have  been  raised  on  the  land  of  the  Prior  of  Bermunds*,  they 
know  not  bv  what  warrant.     Therefore  this  must  be  discussed. 

871.  Concerning  purprestures,  they  say  that  certain  other 
gallo-.vs  have  been  raised  on  the  land  of  the  Prior  of  Bradene- 
stoke,  they  know  not  by  what  warrant  Therefore  this  must  be 
discussed.  Afterwards  it  is  shown  in  the  roll  of  Robert  de 
Lexinton  of  his  last  eyre  that  those  gallows  had  been  raised 
before  his  comin^,so  that  the  Prior  of  Bradenestok  was  summoned 
to  answer  by  what  u-arrant  he  had  raised  them :  and  the  Prior 
came  and  produced  a  charter  of  our  lord  the  King  who  now  is, 
by  which  he  granted  to  the  Prior  toll  and  theam,  etc.,"  wherefore 
because  he  produced  his  warrant  it  was  ordered  that  he  might  go 
without  a  day. 

The  Hl'ndred  of  Porebir**  comes  by  twelve. 

872.  Walter  Wythand  appealed  Osbert  the  Smith  of  Cly ve, 
William  the  gardiner  his  ser\'ant  (//z/z/w/w/zi),  and  Walter  Lug  of 
la  Clive  of  the  death  of  Richard  his  brother.  And  Walter  has 
died.  All  were  outlawed  in  the  county  [court]  on  the  suit  of 
Walter.  Their  chattels  and  tithings  are  in  the  hundred  of 
Jacton.' 

873.  John  de  Haubcrton  appealed  John  son  of  Walter  de 
Eston  of  felony  and  theft  of  money.  John  son  of  Walter  was 
outlawed  on  the  suit  of  John  de  Hauberton*,  and  was  in  the 

*  Perhaps  the  *'  etc."  means  Sike  ami  Soke.  **  In  the  I  ith  century  there  is  already 
much  doubt  as  to  the  meaning  "  of  these  four  words.  On  the  whole,  the  prevail- 
ing dfKirinc  seeiis  10  have  been  that  they  did  nothing.  (**  Hist.  Engl.  Law/  vol.  i, 
pp.  566-7. )  Vei  they  seem  to  have  b-en  sufficient  in  this  case  to  justify  the  gallows  and 
tKeir  use.  Ferhaiw,  however,  infan^enethef  ^1^6.  utfamgetuthef  tdax  have  been  includeil 
in  the  **  etc."  .See  Br-ct.,  lo.  122b,  "  qui  tales  kahettt  libertatas  (the  above)  kabebunt 
prisonam  suam  de  talibus^  quia  possunt  iahs  in  curia  ^ua  juditare^ 

•  Fortbury.  '  Vattoo. 


254  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


tithing  of  Richard  the  tithingman  of  Eston.  Therefore  it  is 
in  mercy.  His  chattels,  2s.  6d,,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

874.  Unknown  malefactors  killed  Wymark  de  Clopton*,  and 
fled.  And  because  the  township  of  Clopton  did  not  make  pur- 
suit after  them  it  is  in  mercy.* 

875.  Robert  de  la  Lane,  overcome  by  cold,  fell  dead  from  his 
mare.  The  first  finder  {prima  inventrtx)  comes  and  is  not 
suspected.     No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

876.  William  son  of  Agatha  de  Portesham  was  drowned 
from  a  boat  in  the  water  at  Portesham.  Judgment,  misadven- 
ture. Price  of  the  boat,  \2d.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 
And  because  the  twelve  jurors  falsely  presented  the  finder,  they 
are  in  mercy. 

877.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Matthew  de  Colum- 
bariis,  Nicholas  son  of  Roger,  Hubert  Hose,  Laurence  de  Sancto 
Mauro,  John  de  Cormaill',  John  Bretasche,  Maurice  de  Berk*,* 
George  de  Fuble,  Roger  de  Calommidesd',  Thomas  Long, 
William  de  Karswell'  (but  Wilh'am  de  Kareswell  came  after- 
wards, and  he  cannot  see  or  hear),  Hugh  de  Insula,  and  Walter 
Bulace,  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Whytelegh'  comes  bv  twelve. 

878.  Richard  de  Wynkelscumbe  was  struck  to  death  by  a 
certain  part  of  a  certain  millstone  of  a  certain  mill.'  Judgment, 
misadventure.  Price  of  the  millstone,  2//.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

879.  Robert  de  Lambrok'  fell  from  a  certain  horse  so  that  he 
died.  No  one  is  suspected.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not 
.suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  horse,  lar., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

880.  William  le  Blund  was  found  drowned  in  a  certain 
broken  dyke.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not  suspected.  No 
Englishry ;  therefore  murder.  And  because  the  twelve  jurors 
falsely   presented   Englishry,  all  are  in  mercy.     The  township 

^  The  township  should  have  raised  the  hue  and  cry  and  have  pursued  the  culprits. 
Sec  Bract.,  f.  124.  '  Berkeley. 

'  From  the  particularity  of  this  description  it  is  to  be  inferred  that  the  stooe  bunt 
or  broke,  and  that  Richard  was  struck  by  a  flying  paiL 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  255 

of  Dunden  did  not  present  that  matter  to  the  county  [court]. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  John  Galebot,  John  de  Fonte,  and 
Thomas  de  Fonte  falsely  presented  themselves  as  kinsmen. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  Afterwards  they  made  fine  for 
I  mark  by  pledge  of  Walkelin  de  Cumton  and  William  Blund 
of  the  same. 

88 1.  Eva  Peperwhyte  appealed  Walter  le  Child  of  Greinton 
of  rape,  and  she  does  not  come,  nor  had  she  pledges  to  prose- 
cute except  [her]  faith  {fideni)}  Walter  comes,  and  the  jurors 
testify  that  they  [the  parties]  have  not  agreed.  He  is  not  guilty. 
Therefore  he  is  quit. 

882.  Herbert  Fromund*  was  found  drowned  in  the  water 
beyond  Whutton'.*  Osbert  son  of  William  de  Kateby,  the  first 
finder,  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in 
mercy,  to  wit,  David  de  Wuhtton,  John  le  Newn  of  the  same. 
Alice,  Herbert's  wife,  was  attached  because  of  this  by  Adam  of 
the  church  of  Kington  and  Walter  de  Whiteleg*  of  the  same, 
and  she  does  not  come.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  No 
Englishry ;  therefore  murder.  The  township  of  Kington  does 
not  come ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

883.  Walter  son  of  John  the  cook  fell  from  a  certain  mare 
which  drew  a  certain  cart,  so  that  he  died.  Judgment,  mis- 
adventure. Price  of  the  mare  and  cart,  5^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer.* 

884.  William  Ernisius,  a  thief,  fled  to  the  church  of  Aysche- 
cote,*  confessed  himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the  realm.  The 
township  of  Sutton  did  not  pursue  him.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  was  not  in  tithing,  because  he  was  a  stranger  of  the 
county  of  Worcester,  nor  had  he  chattels. 

885.  Christiana  de  Sutton'  appealed  Geoffry  Fichet  of  rape. 
She  does  not  come,  nor  had  she  pledges  to  prosecute  beyond 
[her]  faith.  Geoffry  comes,  and  the  jury  testify  that  they  [the 
parties]  are  not  agreed,  and  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he 
is  quit.     Let  Christiana  be  arrested. 

886.  Adam  le  Crane  was  mowing  {fulcavtt)  on  the  moor  of 
Dundon*  and  suddenly  fell  dead.  No  Englishry;  therefore 
murder  upon  Dunden.     No  one  is  suspected. 

*  She  had  found  no  pledges  that  she  would  follow  up  her  charge.     She  had  only 
pledged  her  faith  to  do  so.  *  Wnitiiel  or  North  Woctton. 

^  Probably  the  man  was  riding  the  mare,  fell,  and  the  cart  pa»ed  over  him,  for 
both  cart  and  mare  are  regarded  as  guilty  of  his  death. 

*  A^hcott.  '  Dunden,  in  Compton  Dunden. 


2S6  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

887.  Alice  daughter  of  Lettice  de  Cusington  appealed  Roger 
Bullok  of  Cusington^  of  rape.  Now  she  comes  and  will  not  sue 
against  him.  Therefore  she  and  her  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to 
wit,  Richard  Swenge  of  Cusington  and  Roger  le  Frier  of  the 
same.  The  jurors  testify  that  [the  parties]  are  agreed.  Their 
amercement  is  pardoned  because  they  are  paupers. 

888.  The  jurors  present  that  William  Brunig  of  Cusington 
made  a  purpresture  on  the  highway  of  the  vill  of  Cusington. 
Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  The  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  cause 
the  purpresture  to  be  viewed  and  amended,  etc. 

889.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  the  Abbot  of  Glaston, 
Philip  de  Columbariis,  William  Bellec  of  Cusington,  Jordan 
Ridel  of  the  same,  Walter  Brunig  of  the  same,  Henry  Balde  of 
the  same,  Stephen  le  Harpur  of  the  same,  Adam  le  Freye  of 
the  same,  Robert  de  Edingtone,  Roger  Whythoud,  James  de 
Turlebare  of  the  same,  Henry  de  Stawelle,  Gregory  Burnel  of 
the  same,  Reginald  de  Sapewyk,  John  de  Forda  of  the  same, 
Geoffry  de  Langelegh'  of  the  same,  William  Fichet  of  Little 
Sutton,  Walter  le  Govs  of  Merlinche,  Nicholas  son  of  Humphrey, 
Michel  of  Sutton,  Robert  Mariscall',  Robert  de  Gascoin  of  Dun- 
don,  and  Henry  Bastard  did  not  come  on  the  first  day,  etc. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

890.  Robert  Horlok\  Adam  son  of  Brice,  Roger  de  Insula, 
and  Ranulf  le  Cornwaleys,  accused  of  larceny,  come  and 
defend  everything,  and  put  themselves  upon  the  country  and  the 
four  nearest  townships  of  each  visne  {quatuor  villatas proxitnas 
de  singulis  visnetis)  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  testify  that 
Adam  and  Roger  are  not  guilty.  Therefore  they  are  quit. 
They  testify  that  the  other  two,  Robert  and  Ranulf,  are  thieves. 
Therefore,  etc.* 

Memb,  17. 
The  Manor  of  Hamme  comes  by  six. 

891.  John  son  of  Walter  de  Hamme  was  crushed  to  death  by 
a  certain  cart.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  cart,  oxen,  and  five  geese  [aucarutn)^  34.r.,  for  which 

*  Cossington. 

'  li  scaiccly  needs  the  margiral  "  sus^ "  to  explain  the  **  Therefore,  etc."     There 
is  a  cross  over  each  of  these  nan'.es  \\hcic  first  written. 

*  yiiua,  a  go<ise.     See  Ducanjje,  Glcss.     They  were  no  doubt  in  the  cart  at  the 
time. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  257 

the  sheriff  must  answer.    And  because  the  jury  falsely  presented 
the  finder,  all  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Sumerton'^  comes  by  twelve. 

892.  Adam  son  of  Hugh  de  Sumerton  was  drowned  from 
a  certain  mare  in  the  water  of  Givell.  No  one  is  suspected. 
Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  mare  and  of  the  pack 
\sacci)  4.r.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

893.  John  Peveril  was  found  drowned  in  the  water  near 
Aure.*  No  one  is  suspected.  No  Englishry.  Therefore 
murder. 

894.  Juliana  wife  of  German  was  scalded  to  death  by  a 
certain  tun  de  Gru?  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadven- 
ture. Price  of  the  tun  4^^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 
Juliana  was  buried  without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore 
the  township  of  Northovers  is  in  mercy. 

895.  William  Page  of  Ellcston'  fled  to  the  church  of  Kinges- 
don*.  confessed  himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the  realm.  He  was 
not  in  tithing  because  he  was  a  stranger  and  journeying  {extra- 
neus  et  itinerans\  but  he  was  staying  at  Lideford^  on  the  land  ot 
John  de  Boneviir,  where  he  had  chattels  to  the  value  of  dd. 
Therefore  let  fuller  inquiry  be  made  by  the  hundred  of  Cates- 
sasse  concerning  his  chattels.  The  township  of  Ludeford  is  in 
mercy  for  harbouring  him. 

896.  Walter  Hotte  and  Alice  de  Dene  were  indicted  for 
larceny  elsewhere  before  Robert  de  Lexinton*.  They  were 
suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  Walter  be  exacted 
and  outlawed,  and  Alice  be  exacted  and  waived.  Walter  was 
harboured  in  the  vill  of  Cherletun'  Makerel.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  Alice's  chattels  [were  worth]  8d^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

897.  Jordan  servant  of  the  chaplain  of  Ludeford  was 
drowned  from  the  horse  of  the  same  chaplain  in  the  water  of 
Briw.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of 
the  horse  3^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

898.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  Roger  Payne,  is  in  the  gift 
of  the  King  for  marriage.  Her  land  in  this  hundred  is  worth 
£\Q.     And  because  Margery's  son  (?)  (y?/*)  is  ia  the  custody  of 

*  Somerton.  '  Allcr. 

*  Sec  note  to  No.  810.  *  Lydford. 

2   L 


248  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

him,  and  she  is  dead.  No  Englishry  was  presented.  Therefore, 
murder.  And  because  the  jurors  falsely  presented  Englishry, 
they  are  in  mercy.  William  Illebert  untruly  presented  himself 
as  a  kinsman.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of  William 
de  Marisco  and  Robert  Russel.     He  made  fine  for  ^  mark. 

845.  Unknown  malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Mathew 
the  chaplain  at  Burnham,  and  killed  Thomas  his  brother,  and 
there  bound  Walter  the  clerk,  Robert  Blund  {blundum\  John 
son  of  David,  William  son  of  Mabel,  and  Isabella  daughter  of 
Mathew.  None  of  them  come.  And  because  it  is  testified 
that  the  sheriff  enjoined  the  liberty  of  the  Dean  of  Wells  that 
they  should  attach  them,  and  nothing  was  done  therein  ;  there- 
fore to  judgment  on  the  liberty. 

846.  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  John  Teri,*  and  who  is  dead, 
appealed  William  son  of  William  de  Polet  of  the  death  of  her 
husband.  William  was  suspected  of  that  death,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  not  in 
tithing,  because  he  was  a  free  man.  He  was  of  the  mainpast 
of  the  said  William  his  father.  Therefore  he  [the  father]  is  in 
mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  And  because  the  township  of 
Polet  made  no  pursuit  after  him,  it  is  in  mercy. 

847.  A  certain  thief,  Adam  by  name,  stole  cloths  from  the 
house  of  Roger  Helt  of  Were.  He  was  seen,  and  the  hue  being 
raised,  he  fled  to  the  church  of  Were,  confessed  the  theft,  and 
abjured  the  land.  The  township  of  Were  made  no  suit  after 
him  nor  presented  the  matter  to  the  county  [court].  Therefore 
the  township  is  in  mercy. 

848.  Margery  daughter  of  Aline  Wytecote  appealed  Ralph 
the  carter,  Geoffry  Penewine,  and  Walter  de  la  Pe  .  .  of  the 
peace  and  robbery.  And  she  appealed  William  son  of  Peter  of 
rape.  She  does  not  come,  and  has  no  pledges  beyond  her 
promise  {nisi  fidem)}  All  the  appealed  come.  The  jurors  testify 
that  they  [the  parties]  have  agreed.  Therefore  let  all  be  in 
custody.  Afterwards  they  all  come  and  make  fine  for  40^.  by 
pledge  of  Nicholas  de  la  Pele  and  Ranulf  de  Wedmore. 

849.  Henry  le  Norreys  of  the  county  of  Stafford  fled  to  the 
church  of  Hywys,  confessed  himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the 
realm.  He  was  not  in  tithing  because  he  was  journeying.  His 
chattels  [were  worth]  63^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

*  This  name  is  written  thus  :  **  rrf." 
^  See  note  to  No.  719,  supra. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  259 

who  was  ancestress  {avia)  of  our  lord  the  King  who  now  is,  gave 
that  land  to  one  Osa,  who  was  her  bather  {lotrix),  and  after  her 
death  the  land  descended  to  the  said  Herbert  Makercl,  who  died 
without  heir  of  himself.  They  say  that  Thomas  de  Cyrnecestr' 
the  elder  holds  twelve  acres  and  Ralph  de  Pedewell  holds 
twelve  acres  of  the  said  land.  Petronilla,  Juliana,  and  Cus- 
tancia,  daughters  of  William  le  Bule,  hold  the  pasture,  they 
know  not  by  what  warrant.  Afterwards  Ralph  de  Pedewell 
comes  and  confesses  that  he  holds  the  said  eleven  [sic)  acres 
of  land  at  the  will  of  our  lord  the  King.  Afterwards  they 
present  that  the  said  Petronilla,  Juliana,  and  Custancia  hold 
three  ferlings  of  land  of  the  demesne  of  our  lord  the  King  by 
the  service  of  8j.  6d,  per  annum,  and  it  is  not  known  by  what 
warrant.     Therefore  it  must  be  discussed. 

905.  They  present  that  by  a  certain  covenant  {convencionevi) 
which  was  made  between  themselves  and  the  burgesses  of  Yvel- 
cestr*  [they  have  the  right  to  pasture]  eight  sheep  in  the  pasture 
of  Kingesmore  for  the  whole  year  for  \d.  The  men  of  Yvcl- 
ccstr*  do  not  allow  them  to  have  that  common  as  was  agreed 
between  them.     Therefore  it  must  be  discussed. 

906.  And  the  twelve  jurors  are  in  mercy  for  false  present- 
ment.* 

TiiE  Manor  of  Northovere  comes  by  six. 

907.  John  Hipecok'  fled  to  the  church  of  Northovere,  con- 
fessed himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the  realm.  He  confessed  that 
he  abjured  the  realm  elsewhere,  at  Crauwecumbe.  The  town- 
ship of  Northover  did  not  pursue  him.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  He  was  harboured  at  Crauwxcumbe  after  he  abjured 
the  realm.  Therefore  [the  township]  is  in  mercy.  The  matter 
of  his  chattels  was  dealt  with  before  the  four  justices  sent  to 
deliver  other  gaols. 

908.  William  Maureward  appealed  William  le  Bastard'  of 
breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  of  wounds  and 
robbery,  and  as  accessories  Robert  le  Blund,  Aucketin 
the  clerk  of  Northovere,  Richard  his  brother,  Peter  Lauval, 
Richard  the  fisherman  {le  Peschur\  William  Kitcl,  Hubert  de 
Northovere,  Henry  Budd  of  the  same,  John  the  serjeant  (ser- 

*  We  do  not  know  what  the  false  presentment  was.     Perhaps  this  entry  refers  to 
Nj.  905,  and  was  the  result  of  the  further  '*  discussion." 


260  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

viens)^  Nicholas  Bastard,  Richard  le  Fever,  and  Benedict  Beg. 
All  the  appealed,  except  Benedict,  come.  The  jurors  testify  that 
all  are  guilty.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  They  made  fine 
for  20S,  by  pledge  of  Nicholas  le  Bastard,  Thorstan  the  gold- 
smith {aurifaber\  and  Richard  Richeman.  Benedict  was 
attached,  but  his  pledges  have  died. 

Memb,  \jd. 

The  Hundred  of  Keynesham  comes  by  twelve. 

909.  Henry  de  Cherelwurth  is  in  mercy  because  he  did  not 
come  with  his  fellow  jurors. 

910.  William  Long  of  Bristoll*  killed  a  certain  man  in 
Bristoir  and  fled  to  the  church  of  Keynesham  and  abjured  the 
realm.  He  dwelt  {fuit  manens)  in  the  burgh  of  Bristoll'.  It 
is  not  known  [what]  chattels  [he  had].  And  because  the  vill  of 
Keynesham  did  not  make  pursuit  after  him  it  is  in  mercy. 

911.  Robertson  of  William  the  smith  and  Agnes  his  wife 
fled  to  the  church  of  Keynesham,  confessed  themselves  thieves, 
and  abjured  the  realm.  And  because  the  vill  of  Bristelton'*  did 
not  make  pursuit  after  them,  it  is  in  mercy.  He  {sic)  had  no 
chattels,  nor  were  they  {sic)  in  tithing  because  they  were  strangers. 

912.  Gunilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  David  le  Mazun,  appealed 
John  the  carter  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and 
of  wounds  which  he  caused  to  David  her  husband,  and  wherein 
it  is  testified  that  the  wounds  were  mortal.  And  because  the 
county  [court]  dismissed  (dirnisit)  John  under  pledges  before 
they  had  hope  of  his  [David's]  life,  and  it  is  testified  that 
twenty-three  pieces  {ossa)  were  extracted  from  his  head,  to 
judgment  on  the  county.'  The  jurors  testify  that  David  died 
of  those  wounds.  Therefore  let  John  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  William  the  miller*  {le  mutter)  in  Hors- 
ington.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.     He  had  no  chattels. 

913.  Geoff ry  Young  of  Keynesham  was  crushed  to  death. 
No  one  is  suspected.     No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

914.  Thomas  le  Norreys  was  crushed  to  death  by  a  certain 
cart  in  which  was  a  certain  millstone,  and  which  was  drawn  by 
six   oxen.      Judgment,   misadventure.     The  price  of  the  cart, 

*  Brislington. 

'  In  cases  of  homicide  the  accused  could  not  be  released  on  sureties.     See  Glanv. 
xiv.  I,  and  Btact,  fo.  123.  '  See  Note  to  No.  604. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  26 1 


millstone,  and  oxen,  35^.,  for  which  William  de  Cherelwurth  and 
Henry  de  Cherelwurth  must  answer.  And  because  they  had  not 
the  money,  as  they  ought  to  have  had  before  the  justices,  they 
are  in  mercy. 

915.  Walter  son  of  Nicholas  and  Robert  son  of  Aluina  de 
Filton  cut  down  a  certain  tree,  and  the  tree  fell  upon  Walter  so 
that  he  died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  tree  2^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

916.  Unknown  malefactors  killed  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife 
of  Robert  de  Wylmingdon*.  It  is  not  known  who  they  were. 
The  jurors  did  not  present  the  finder  upon  its  roll.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

917.  Nicholas  de  Newton  fell  from  his  horse  so  that  he  died. 
No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the 
horse  2J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  John  le  Newman, 
to  whom  the  money  was  delivered  that  he  might  answer  [for  the 
price],  has  not  the  money.     Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 

918.  John  de  Linus  was  crushed  to  death  by  a  certain  mill- 
whcel.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price 
of  the  wheel,  3J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

919.  Touching  new  customs  {novis  consuetudinibus\  they  say 
that  the  Abbot  of  Glaston  has  set  up  {levavit)  new  customs  at 
Merkebir',*  to  wit,  that  he  should  take  for  every  ox  {averts) 
found  in  his  herbage  6^/.,  and  for  every  sheep  2d,  Therefore 
this  must  be  discussed. 

920.  Walter  de  Alneto,  suspected  of  larceny,  fled.  There- 
fore let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Gilbert  Young  in  Cumton\  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His 
chattels  [were  worth]  36^.  2^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

The  Burgh  of  Langeport  comes  by  twelve. 

921.  Walter  le  Parker  was  drowned  at  Langeport.  No  one 
is  suspected.  No  Englishry.  Therefore  murder.  The  jurors 
present  no  finder.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  The  coroners 
testify  that  John  Love  was  the  first  finder,  and  he  does  not  come. 
He  was  attached  by  Robert  Corbin  and  William  la  Hare 
of  la  Lade.     Therefore  it  is  considered  that  they  be  in  mercy. 

922.  Adam  Russel  was  drowned  from  a  certain  boat  in  the 

^  MarLsbuiy. 


262  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

water  of  Peret.^  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  boat,  3J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  And 
because  Thomas  Brun  and  Adam  Wlf  of  Briges,  to  whom 
that  money  was  delivered,  had  it  not  before  the  justices,  they  are 
in  mercv. 

923.  Roger  Harald'  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  harboured 
(/«//  receptatus)  in  the  vill  of  Langeport,  without  tithing.  There- 
fore it  [the  township]  is  in  mercy. 

924.  Adam  the  forester  of  Bristilton'*  and  Nicholas  Copin  of 
Cherleworth',  accused  of  larceny,  have  fled.  The  jurors  say  that 
they  suspect  them  of  larceny  of  sheep^  and  other  [things]. 
Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Adam  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Gilbert  the  tithingman  of  Bristilton'  and  [Nicholas] 
was  of  the  mainpast  of  Robert  Tresor  in  Cheleworth*.  There- 
fore they  are  in  mercy  for  the  flight.     They  had  no  chattels. 

925.  Robert  le  Bok,  accused  of  this,  that  he  was  thought  to 
have  burned  the  houses  of  John  de  Kylkenny  in  Cheleworht, 
fled.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Robert  le  Brok*  in  Cheleworth*. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy  for  the  flight.  The  jurors  say  that 
he  is  not  guilty  of  the  burning.  Therefore  he  may  return  if  he 
will.     No  chattels,  etc. 

The  Hundred  of  Hareclive*  comes  by  twelve. 

926.  Robert  son  of  John  de  Leghe  was  struck  by  a  cer- 
tain millwheel  in  Aston'  so  that  he  died.  Richard  his  brother 
first  found  him.  He  comes  and  is  not  suspected.  Judgment, 
misadventure.  Price  of  the  wheel  12^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

927.  Unknown  malefactors  came  by  niorht  to  the  house  of 
Christiana  de  Ponte  in  Wynfrod,*  and  bound  her  and  her  daughter, 
and  carried  off  their  chattels.  It  is  not  known  who  they  were. 
No  one  is  suspected. 

928.  Wolward  the  fuller  {le  Tukare)  was  found  drowned  in  a 
certain  ditch  near  Langeford.  Osanna  his  wife  first  found  him, 
and  is  dead.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
No  Englishry,  etc.     Therefore  murder. 

'  The  Parret.  »  Brislington. 

'  **  ovium"    The  word  commonly  uccd  for  sheep  is  bidentes. 

*  Haricliff.  »  Winford. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  263 

929.  Hugh  son  of  Reginald  de  Felton  [for  Agnes  his  wife]* 
appealed  Simon  Bilhok  in  the  county  [court],  of  the  peace  and 
for  striking  Agnes  his  wife.  Now  comes  Agnes  herself  and  sues 
against  him  and  appeals  Simon  that  on  Tuesday  next  before  the 
feast  of  St.  Barnabas  the  apostle  in  the  21st  year,  he,  Simon, 
came  to  the  fold  of  Richard  le  Waleys  at  Felton',*  where  Agnes 
was  in  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  assaulted  (insultavit) 
Agnes,  and  gave  her  a  certain  wound  in  the  head  and  another  in 
her  riglit  hand  by  a  certain  pick  axe  (?)  (Jiachia  adpykum),  and 
that  this  he  did  wickedly  and  feloniously  she  offers  to  deraign 
against  him  as  the  court  shall  consider.  And  Simon  comes  and 
defends  the  peace,  felony,  and  striking,  etc.,  and  craves  judgment 
whether  she  could  or  ought  to  put  him  to  law  {ad  legem  ponere)^ 
inasmuch  as  a  woman  cannot  have  an  appeal  against  anyone 
except  for  the  death  of  her  husband  or  for  rape»  ctc.,^  and  he  says 
that  she  appealed  him  in  hate  and  spite,  and  therein  he  puts 
himself  upon  the  country.  And  because  it  is  shown  clearly  by 
the  jurors  that  the  appeal  was  made  through  hate  and  spite  and 
not  for  anything  else,  it  is  considered  that  the  appeal  be  null,  and 
so  she  be  in  mercy  for  her  false  appeal.  And  for  the  keeping  of 
the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  let  inquest  be  made  by  the  jurors, 
who  say  upon  their  oath  that  in  truth  the  said  Simon  struck  her 
with  his  naked  hand  and  not  with  any  hatchet*  Therefore  Simon 
is  in  mercy.  He  made  fine  for  40J.  by  pledge  of  William  de 
Kane',  John  Sprot,  and  Robert  Frankeham  of  Bakewell.  Richard 
le  Waleys  is  in  mercy  because  by  his  abbetting  the  appeal  was 
made.  He  made  fine  for  himself  and  Agnes  for  10  marks  by 
pledge  of  Nicholas  de  Meryet,  Geoffry  de  Dynaud,  Ralph  brother 
of  Bernand,  John  de  Bonevill',  Richard  de  Langeford',  William 
de  Orewaye,  Thomas  Trevet,  and  William  Kent. 


^  The  words  in  brackets  here  are  interlineations  in  the  original. 
'  Felton,  a  tithing  of  Winford. 

*  **  y«  (J  It  thus  casibus  femina  appellum  haheat  videndum  est^  et  sciendum  quod  non 
nisi  in  duobus  casibus  per  quod  alicui  lex  apparens  debeat  adjudicari^  si/icet  fwn  nisi 
injuria  et  violentia  rorpori  sua  illata^  sicut  de  raptu,  ut  predicttim  est,  I/em  et  de 
morte  viri  sui  inttrfecti  inter  brachia  sua^  et  von  alio  mdo.*  (Bract.,  fo.  148b.)  The 
picluresfjue  expression  '*  inter  brachia  sua  "  seems  to  have  l)een  technical.  Coke 
.^ays  they  mean  th.it  the  woman  must  not  only  le  wife  de  jure  but  de  facto  "without 
elopement  from  her  husband,  etc.,  or  divorce."  She  must  be  in  possc'sion.  2nd 
Inst.,  fo.  317. 

*  Here  hachia  alone  !s  used. 


264  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLF.AS. 


Memb,  18. 

The  Hundred  of  Hareclive — continued. 

930.  Robert  le  Saltere  of  Hanespull*  was  found  killed  in  the 
wood  of  VVanlegh*  near  Baruwe* ;  it  is  not  known  by  whonL 
Hobbe  de  Eston ,  who  first  found  him,  comes  and  is  not  suspected. 
No  Englishry,  etc.  ;  therefore  murder.  Afterwards  it  is  testified 
that  a  certain  Walter  de  Merefeud,  an  approver  captured  at 
Bristol!*,  was  taken  to  Yvelcestr'  and  there  confessed  larceny,  and 
that  he  killed  the  aforesaid  Robert,  and  was  there  hanged.  The 
twelve  jurors  present  that  the  approver  was  taken  in  the  time 
when  Richard  de  Langeford*  was  sheriff;  and  it  appears  by 
the  rolls  of  the  coroners  that  he  was  taken  in  the  time  when 
Herbert  son  of  Mathew  was  sheriff.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy. 

931.  Roger  Scurye  was  outlawed  in  the  county  [court]  for 
wounds  which  he  caused  to  Adam  Crck\  He  was  in  the  main- 
past  of  John  Cole  in  Dundray.  Therefore  he  [John]  is  in  mercy 
for  the  flight  John  Cole  was  attached  for  those  wounds,  inas- 
much as  the  said  Roger  inflicted  them  by  his  order.  He  [John] 
does  not  come,  and  he  was  attached  by  Richard  de  Upton  in 
Dundray,  William  Cole  of  the  same.  Robert  of  the  same,  Robert 
de  Crowenhull,  and  Robert  de  Dundray.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  The  jurors  testify  that  the  said  Roger  inflicted  the 
wounds  on  Adam  by  order  of  John  Cole,  and  that  he  died 
thereof.     Therefore  let  John  be  captured. 

932.  John  Cole,  taken  for  the  death  of  Adam  Crek,  whom 
Roger  Scuri  killed,  and  as  it  is  said,  by  his  [John's]  order,  comes 
and  defends  the  whole,  etc.,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country. 
The  jurors*  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty,  either  of  consent  or  of 
order.  Therefore  he  is  quit.  And  William  de  Eston*  [is  in 
mercy]  for  the  false  indictment  made  by  him.  Afterwards 
William  came,  and  made  fine  for  5  marks  by  pledge  of  Ralph 
son  of  Bernard,  William  de  Grindham,  Hugh  Fichet,  and  Ralph 
fitz  Urse. 

933.  Richard  Budde  of  Acston  struck  William  del  Egge  in 
the  heel  with  a  sickle  {falce)  so  that  on  the  third  day  thereafter* 

*  Barrow. 

*  QuiCrg^  Was  this  the  same  jury  t^at  in  th^  preceding  case  had  testified  that  John 
was  guilty  ?     Unfortunately  we  cannot  tell  from  the  recui  J. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  26$ 

he  died,  and  Richard  straightway  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  frankpledge  of  Ralph  de 
Gatekumb*  and  William  le  Thayn,  who  have  both  died.  His 
chattels,  3^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

934.  Mabel  daughter  of  Geoffry  de  Ipres  of  Portbyr* 
appealed  Ralph  the  tailor  of  Aston  in  the  county  [court]  of  the 
peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and  of  rape,  and  now  she  does  not 
come,  and  she  found  no  pledges  beyond  [her]  faith.  Ralph  the 
tailor  docs  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Alexander  de  la 
Forde,  Richard  de  Ilberd'  of  the  same,  Adam  son  of  Geoffry  of 
the  same,  and  Robert  Bracy  of  the  same.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy.  The  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are  agreed. 
Therefore  let  Ralph  and  Mabel  be  taken. 

935.  Roger  Gule  of  Bukwell,  a  certain  boy  of  the  age  of 
seven  years,  fell  into  a  certain  leaden  vessel  {qiiodam  plumbo) 
full  of  hot  water  and  died.  Roger  son  of  Eva  Blund,  who 
first  found  him,  comes  and  is  not  suspected,  nor  [is]  any  one 
else.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  vessel  2s.,  for  which 
the  sheriff,  etc.  The  township  of  Bakewell'*  is  in  mercy  because 
it  did  not  present  that  Roger  wished  to  strike  a  certain  dog,  and 
for  the  fear  that  he  had  in  striking  the  said  dog,  he  fell  into  the 
vessel,  as  is  testified  by  the  rolls  of  the  coroners. 

936.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  David  Basset,  Godfrey 
del  Ausno,  John  Bretesch,  Nicholas  son  of  Roger,  John  de  la 
Grene,  and  William  de  Byaumund'  did  not  come  on  the  first 
day.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

[The  Hundred  of]  Horethyrne*  comes  by  twelve. 

937.  A  certain  bull  [belonging  to]  the  lord  Earl  of  Salisbury 
killed  Henry  son  of  Geoffry  de  Cherleton,  a  boy  aged  seven 
years.  Geoffry  his  father,  who  first  found  him,  comes  and  is  not 
suspected,  nor  is  any  one  else.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price 
of  the  bull  5^".,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  account. 

938.  All  the  jurors  of  this  hundred  are  in  mercy  because 
they  elected  one  Thomas  le  Porter  one  of  the  jury,  and  the 
same  Thomas  is  appealed  of  his  members  (de  viembris  suis\ 
and  they  did  not  reveal  that  to  the  justices  before  [they  chose 
him]. 

939.  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Roger  de  Gyverny,  appealed 

^  Dak  well,  near  Nailsea.  '  Ilorethome. 

2    M 


266  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


in  the  county  [court]  William  Barat  of  the  death  of  Roger  her 
husband,  and  Thomas  chaplain  of  HolewalV  Durant  Potel  of 
Warham,  John  de  Cyrnccestr'  brother  of  the  said  chaplain, 
William  de  Cyrenccstr*,  and  John  the  clerk  of  the  chaplain,  as 
accessories.  Now  she  comes  and  pursues  her  appeal  against 
them.  Richard  de  Langcford,  at  that  time  sheriff,  and  the 
coroners  testify  that  the  said  William  Barat  and  Durant  Potel 
were  committed  by  replevin  (commissi  fuerunt  per  plevinam)^ 
for  the  consideration  of  the  county  of  Dorset  Thomas  the 
chaplain  was  delivered  to  Humphrey,  Archdeacon  of  Salisbury, 
who  claimed  him  for  the  Bishop.  Therefore  let  full  inquiry 
be  made  concerning  them  in  the  county  of  Dorset.  And  be- 
cause Richard  de  Langeford',  the  sheriff,  dismissed  them  upon 
replevin,  he  is  in  mercy.*  John  de  Cyrencestr*,  William  de 
Cyrencestr*,  and  John  the  clerk  of  the  said  chaplain,  were  out- 
lawed in  the  county  [court]  upon  Muriel's  suit.  They  had  no 
chattels,  nor  were  they  in  tithing,  because  strangers.  And 
because  the  deed  was  done  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  and  the 
county  would  not  pursue  judgment  against  William  Barat, 
Thomas  the  chaplain  of  Holcwal',  and  Durant  Potel,  notwith- 
standing judgment  made  in  the  county  of  Dorset  concerning 
their  attachment,  the  county  is  in  mercy.  And  Muriel  is  told 
that  she  should  proceed  against  them  in  the  county  [court]  of 
Somerset  until  they  be  outlawed. 

940.  Robert  Barat  of  Asperton  appealed  Robert  de  Aula 
of  the  death  of  John  his  brother  in  the  county  [court],  and 
Robert]  was  outlawed  upon  Robert  Barat's  suit  in  the  county 
court].  He  [Robert]  was  of  the  mainpast  of  Isabella  de  Chese- 
burford'  in  the  county  of  Dorset.  Therefore  she  is  in  mercy 
for  [his]  flight.  He  had  no  chattels.  Ralph  le  Bret,  Robert 
le  Bret,  Robert  his  son,  and  Richard  le  Neyr,  attached  for  that 
death,  do  not  come.  Ralph  was  attached  by  Geoffry  de  Stok* 
and  John  son  of  Stephen  ;  Robert  le  Bret  was  attached  by 
Richard  le  Hird'  and  John  de  Kite  1  ford ' ;  and  Robert  son  of 
Robert  by  Robert  Colet  of  Fidnde  and  Richard  Doget ;  and 
Richard  le  Neir  by  Walter  de  Hampton,  William  Beynin,  Alan 
de  la  Wodcbrig',  and  Robert  de  ThornhiU'.  Therefore  all  are 
in  mercy.     The  jurors  say  that  ihey  do  not  suspect  them.    There- 

1  Hoi  well. 

^  The  crime  of  homicide  wns  not  bailable. 


SOxMERSETSHIRE   PLFAS.  267 


lore  they  are  quit.     The  township  of  Hoievval',  where  John  was 
killed,  is  in  mercy  because  it  did  not  capture  Robert.* 

941.  Ralph  son  of  Durant  de  Cumb'  appealed  in  the  county 
[court]  Roger  le  Porter  of  Cumb*,  Richard  Ruffus,  Walter  de  la 
Pette,  and  Ralph  Keye,  of  the  peace,  wounds,  and  robbery,  etc. 
Now  he  does  not  sue  against  them.  Therefore  he'  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Walter  de  Ledder- 
ford'  and  John  de  Netherford'.  Roger  le  Porter  and  the  other 
appellees  come,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are 
not  agreed,  but  they  say  that  they  [the  appellees]  are  guilty  of 
that  beating.  Therefore  let  them  be  in  custody.  Afterwards 
Roger  and  the  others  came  and  made  fine  for  40s.  by  pledge  of 
Thomas  le  Porter,  Robert  de  Bosco,  and  Gilbert  Graienloyl. 

942.  John  Osmund,  accused  of  theft  of  sheep,  fled  to  the 
church  of  Pultinlon',  confessed  that  he  was  a  thief,  and  abjured 
the  realm.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Rimton.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy  for  receiving  [him].  His  chattels,  4^".,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  answer.  Henry  the  tithingman  and  the  whole 
township  of  Rimpton  are  in  mercy  because  they  did  not  suffi- 
ciently appraise  the  said  chattels. 

943.  Isabella  wife  of  Warin  de  Harewode  found  certain 
cloths  and  stolen  goods  {pelfam  furatavi)  in  the  court  house 
{curia)  of  Warin,  and  it  was  said  that  those  cloths  belonged  to 
a  certain  chaplain  of  Schepton'  in  the  hundred  of  Norton,  [who 
was]  killed.  Therefore  let  full  inquiry  be  made  there.'  The 
jurors  do  not  suspect  Warin  and  Isabella.  Therefore  they  go 
quit. 

Memb,  \Zd, 

The  Hundred  of  Horetiiyrne — continued. 

944.  Roger  Peper,  accused  of  larceny  of  two  stolen  mares 
{de  latrocinio  duarufn  equarutn  furatarum\  and  of  cloths  and 
the  goods  (pelf a)  of  one  William  Blund  which  he  was  thought 
to  have  stolen,  and  to  have  abducted  William's  wife,  comes  and 
defends  the  larceny  and  everything,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country  for  good  and  ill.  The  twelve  jurors,  together  with  the 
four  townships,  to  wit,  Horsinton,  Chyriton',  Cumb',  and  Stawell*, 

*  The  roll  has  "John,"  obviously  by  a  clerical  misake. 

^  Over  his  name  is  written  '*  cap' " — let  him  be  arrested. 

'  That  is,  in  the  hundred  of  Norton,  as  the  marginal  note  shows. 


268  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


come  and  say  upon  their  oath  that  he  is  a  thief,  and  that  they 
suspect  him  of  many  thefts.  Therefore,  etc.  He  had  no 
chattels. 

945.  Concerning  purprestures,  they  say  that  Albertus  the 
parson  of  Sandford'*  has  obstructed  a  certain  path  in  Sandford*, 
and  has  diverted  a  certain  watercourse  in  the  same  vill.  There- 
fore he  is  in  mercy.  Let  the  obstruction  be  removed  and  the 
water  restored  as  it  ought  and  was  wont  to  be.  The  sheriff  is 
notified. 

946.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Monte 
Acuto,  Hugh  de  Kenardel',  Roger  de  Vilers,  Payne  son  of 
William,  Simon  de  SifTerwast,  John  de  Sandputte,  Reginald 
Wodic,  Richard  de  Nutherton*,  Robert  de  Seles,  Philip  de 
Haulketon*,  and  Walter  Blund,  did  not  come  on  the  first  day. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Meleburn  comes  by  twelve, 

947.  Walter  Cheke  was  struck  by  a  certain  mill-wheel  in 
Meleburn*,  so  that  on  the  third  day  thereafter  he  died.  No  one 
is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  wheel  12^., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

948.  William  son  of  Hilary  Golde  fell  into  a  certain  leaden 
vessel  (t^nmbo)  full  of  hot  water,  so  that  on  the  third  day  there- 
after he  died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  vessel  I2i/.,  for  which  the  sheriff,  etc  And  the 
twelve  jurors  are  in  mercy  because  they  were  often  called  and 
did  not  come  {quia  st/ius  tH)catt  futrunt  et  non  x/enerunf). 

The  Hundred  of  Bruvton**  comes  by  twelve, 

949.  AH  the  twelve  jurors  are  in  mercy  for  false  presen- 
tation. 

95a  Robert  Weland'  \\*as  struck  by  a  certain  branch  which 
fell  upon  him,  so  that  on  the  third  day  thereafter  he  died.  No 
one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadx-enture.  Price  of  the  branch 
2«/„  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  And  because  the  jurors 
testify  in  the  written  \*erdict  {in  xmt/icfj  smo  scrr/fo)  that  he  died 
forthwith,  and  now  they  s.iy  orally  that  he  died  on  the  third  day 
thereafter,  all  are  in  mercy. 

^  SuKi^x\i  Orcas.  '  Bntoo. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLE.\S.  269 

951.  A  certain  stranger  was  found  dead  in  La  Swell*  be- 
tween Bni>'ton*  and  Upton'*  without  wx)und.  It  is  not  known 
who  he  ^-as,  Xo  one  is  suspected.  Xo  English r\%  etc  There- 
fore  murder. 

952.  Reginald  Patew>Tie,  Aline  his  wife,  William  his  son, 
Margaret  his  daughter,  and  Ex'a  his  servant,  were  burned  in 
Reginald's  house  at  Homw\-k'  by  misadventure.  John  son  of 
Reginald,  who  first  found  them,  comes  and  is  not  suspected,  nor 
is  an'/one  else. 

053.  Robert  de  Stonithewair,  Richard  de  Sumerton,  Godfrey 
le  Barat[o]r,  Adam  Belami,  Geoffn*  Lawayte  of  Br\n2ton\  Roger 
de  la  Clive  of  Batecumbe,*  and  John  Prillok  killed  Xicholas  le 
Serle,  the  seijeanf  of  Upton  at  Upton,  and  all  of  them  betook 
themsel\-es  to  the  prior\'  of  Chartuse  after  the  death  of  Xicholas. 
They  were  not  in  any  tithing,  but  were  of  the  mainpast  of  the 
Prior-  Therefore  he  [the  Prior]  is  in  mercy.  They  had  no 
chattels.  Afterwards  it  is  testified  bv  the  rolls  of  the  coroners 
that  Richard  de  Sumerton  abode  in  the  vill  of  Sumerton' 
Godfrey  le  Barat[o]r  in  Sutton,  Adam  Belami  in  Schepton' 
Vivon,  Geoffry  la  \Vayte  in  Breuham*  Mucegms,  Roger  de  la 
Clive  in  Batecumbe,  and  John  Prillok  in  Prestel*.*  Therefore  all 
the  said  townships  are  in  mercy. 

954.  Alice  Chapil  of  Kar\'  complains  that  Edith  daughter  of 
Alan  struck  her  with  a  stone  in  the  eve  bv  the  order  of  one 
Bartholomew,  who  is  present,  and  Edith  likewise  comes  and 
says  that  she  did  not  strike  her.  The  jurors  say  that  she  did  not 
strike  her  as  she  [Alice]  complains,  but  they  say  positively  that 
Bartholomew  lay  with  both  those  women,  and  that  the  complaint 
was  [made]  through  hate  and  spite.  Therefore  nothing,  for  they 
all  are  paupers. 

955.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Master  Richard  the 
leech  {fn€diats)y  William  de  Cadeworth,  Richard  the  serjeant 
of  Redlis*  did  not  come  on  the  first  day,  etc.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy. 

956.  Osbcrt  Pethun,  accused  of  harbouring  thieves,  comes 
and  defends  the  harbouring  and  everj'thing,  and  puts  himself 
upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  The  twelve  jurors,  tc^ther 
with  the  townships  of  Bruyton',  Bryuham,  Rodlis,and  Northbyr*, 
say  upon  their  oath  that  he  is  guilty,  and  that  they  suspect  him 

'  Upton  Noble.  *  Batconlw.  •  **  serx'ienfemJ" 

*  Brewbam.  *  Pncstlei(*h,  in  Doulting.  *  Redlinch. 


270  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

of  harbouring  thieves.     Therefore,  etc.     His  chattels,  6s,  6d.,  for 
which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 


The  Hundred  of  Chyuton,*  comes  by  twelve. 

957.  Edith  mother  of  William  de  Stok'  was  killed  in  her 
house  at  Cumpton'  by  night.  Robert  the  clerk  of  Cumpton,' 
accused  of  this  because  he  was  thought  to  have  been  there, 
comes  and  defends  everything.  The  jurors  say  that  he  is  not 
guilty.     Therefore  let  him  go  quit. 

958.  Robert  Scissor  of  Childecumpton'  put  himself  in  the 
church  of  Cumpton',  confessed  himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the 
realm.  He  dwelt  in  the  vill  of  Chyuton,  in  the  tithing  of  Ralph 
de  Chyuton.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  22s,,  for 
which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  had 
no  chattels  beyond  the  value  of  los.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy. 

959.  One  Dermot,  an  Irishman,  killed  one  John  Balle  in 
Camelegh*  by  night,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  No  one  else  is  suspected.  No  Englishry,  etc. 
Judgment,  murder.  He  had  no  chattels.  He  was  of  the  main- 
past  of  William  de  Marisco  of  Camel.  Therefore  he  [William] 
is  in  mercy. 

960.  Ralph  Scissor  of  Cornwall  fled  to  the  church  of 
Hubbelegh*,  confessed  himself  a  thief  of  one  mare  which  he 
there  took  away,  and  abjured  the  realm.  He  had  no  chattels, 
nor  was  he  in  tithing  because  a  passing  stranger  {extraneus 
transiens). 

961.  William  chaplain  of  Linton  fell  from  a  certain  mare, 
so  that  he  died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadven- 
ture. Price  of  the  mare,  27^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

Memb.  19. 

The  Hundred  of  Chyuton' — continued. 

962.  Nicholas  Thorel  of  Kingeston'*  appealed  in  the  county 
[court]  Richard  Cole  of  Kingeston',  Walter  his  brother,  and 
Thomas  de  Marisco,  of  the  peace  and  of  wounds,  etc.  The 
same   appealed   William    Blundel    of    Kingeston'    and   Adam 

*  Chewton,  «  Kingston  Seymour, 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  27 1 

Bigeherm,  of  inciting  {de  precepto),  Nicholas  does  not  come. 
Therefore  let  him  be  taken,  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are 
in  mercy,  to  wit,  William  Thorel  of  Kingeston'  and  Robert  de 
Legh  of  the  Abbot  of  St.  Augustin.^  Richard  Cole  and  all  the 
others,  except  Adam  Bigeherm,  come.  Adam  was  attached 
by  Walter  Young  of  la  Yha  of  Kingeston*  and  William  de 
la  Watere  of  the  same.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  The 
jurors  say  that  in  truth  the  said  Richard  and  Walter  are  guilty 
of  beating  and  of  the  wounds  caused  to  Nicholas.  Therefore  let 
both*  be  in  custody.  They  made  fine  for  5  marks  by  pledge 
of  William  Cole  with  the  whole  of  his  tithing  of  Kingeston'. 
Touching  the  others,  they  say  that  they  are  not  guilty.  There- 
fore they  are  quit,  and  Nicholas  is  in  mercy.     Let  him  be  taken. 

963.  Hawise  de  Cumpton*  appealed  Roger  Tyrel  the  young 
{juvenem)  of  rape,  and  she  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  let  her 
be  taken.  She  did  not  find  pledges  to  prosecute.  Therefore, 
nothing.  Roger  comes,  and  the  jurors  say  that  in  truth  Roger  lay 
with  her  but  that  half  a  year  had  elapsed  before  complaint  was 
made  that  he  had  lain  with  her,  and  they  say  that  [the  parties] 
are  agreed.  Therefore  let  Roger  be  in  custody.  He  made 
fine  for  2  marks  by  pledge  of  Roger  Tyrel  his  father,  James 
Wace,  John  de  Fil,  Richard  de  Upton,  and  Waukel'  de 
Boneham. 

964.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Marisco 
son  of  Jordan  de  Marisco,  Humphry  de  Scovill',  Hugh  de  Vivon', 
John  Hose,  Nicholas  son  of  Martin,  Robert  de  Sancta  Crucc, 
Laurence  de  Sancto  Mauro,  John  de  Peanton,  the  Abbot  of 
Keynsham,  Alfred  de  Nicol,  Peter  Picter,  John  Brataske,  the 
Prior  of  Merton,  Robert  de  Gurney,  AnketiT  de  Henton',  William 
de  Vilers,  William  de  Hentun',  Alexander  de  Estuna,  William 
Norens  of  Cupton*,  and  John  Musbanck  did  not  come  on  the  first 
day.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Norton  comes  by  twelve. 

965.  Malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Ranulf  de  Brothon', 
and  Andrew  de  Halton'  and  John  the  cobbler  {sutor)  of  Jerlinton* 
were  accused  of  that  death.*     Andrew  was  hanged  at  Yvelcestr' 

*  I  understand  this  to  mean  Rol)ert  of  Abbot's  Leigh,  near  Bristol. 

'  The  roll  has  **  omnes  "  here.    Obviously  only  Richard  and  Waller  are  referred  to. 

*  Yarlington. 

*  There  seems  also  to  have  been  murder  done.     Nothing  is  said  before  of  this. 


272  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


before  William  de  Sancto  Edmundo  and  his  fellows,  justices 
assigned  to  deliver  the  gaol  at  Yvelcestr'.  John  the  cobbler  was 
hanged  at  Scireburn'*  before  Robert  de  Lexington  and  his  fellows. 
John  Cruce,  accused  of  the  same,  was  sued  before  Robert  de 
Lexington  touching  the  charge.  And  because  it  is  testified  that 
Andrew  de  Halton  was  harboured  at  Halton  after  the  deed,  and 
John  the  cobbler  was  harboured  at  Gerlinton',  both  townships 
are  in  mercy. 

966.  Allelinus  de  Cori  was  found  dead  outside  the  vill  of 
Wynkauelton*.'  His  wife,  the  first  finder,  comes,  and  is  not 
suspected.  No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder.  And  the  twelve 
jurors  falsely  presented  a  finder.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

967.  Alan  le  Bailer  of  Burton*  killed  Nicholas  son  of  Lefchild 
of  Chcrlton.  Richard  son  of  the  same  Nicholas  was  then 
present.  Alan  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed. Alan  was  in  tithing  at  Buriton*  in  the  manor  of 
Gillingham  in  the  county  of  Dorset,  but  the  name  of  the  tithing 
is  not  known,  nor  is  it  known  what  his  chattels  were.  The 
township  of  Boy  ford*  did  not  pursue.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

968.  William  de  Scuriford'  killed  William  the  clerk  of  Boy- 
ford*,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
William  de  Sturiford'  was  not  in  tithing  in  this  county  because 
he  was  of  Devereus  in  the  county  of  Wylton.  The  same 
William's  chattels,  26j.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 
Edward  de  Devereus,  who  was  then  there,  is  not  suspected  ; 
and  as  he  withdrew  himself,  let  him  return  if  he  will.  After- 
wards it  is  testified  that  Edward  was  sent  to  gaol  in  the  time 
of  Herbert  son  of  Matthew,'  and  no  one  answers  for  his  time. 
Therefore  to  judgment. 

969.  Unknown  malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Osbert  the 
chaplain  of  Scopton'*  and  killed  Osbert,  Robert  his  brother, 
Cecily,  and  Isabella.  Walter  son  of  Ralph  the  cook,  the  first 
finder,  comes,  and  is  not  suspected.  Walter  Poydras,  arrested 
for  that  death,  comes  and  defends  everything,  and  puts  himself 
upon  the  country  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  is 
guilty.  Therefore,  etc.*  And  because  it  is  testified  that  the 
same  Walter  Poydras,  when  he  was  first  accused  of  that  death, 
was  taken  and  led  before  the  county  [court],  and  the  county 
[court]  dismissed  him  under  pledges,  notwithstanding  that  he 

^  Sherborne.  *  Wincanlon.  '  Then  sheriff. 

*  Shtrpton  Montague.  ®  The  margin  says  *'ji/jr/V»ji/j." 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  273 


was  accused  of  homicide  {de  vtorte  hominis\  the  county  \s  in 
mercy.^  Walter  had  no  chattels.  No  Englishry  was  presented 
touching  the  death  of  Osbert  the  chaplain  ;  therefore  murder. 

970.  Ralph  son  of  Reginald  de  Bruh*e  was  crushed  to  death 
by  a  certain  cart  which  fell  upon  him.  No  one  is  suspected. 
Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  cart  and  the  oxen  which 
drew  it  1 5 J.  4i/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

971.  William  Scys  and  Walter  Brun  beat  Peter  the  forester 
of  Wykauelton,  and  by  reason  of  this  fled  to  the  church.  Because 
they  fled  to  the  church  the  sheriff  attached  them,  and  they  do 
not  come.  Therefore  they  and  their  pledges  are  in  mercy. 
William's  pledges,  Richard  the  smith  of  la  Pcnne  and  Richard 
Young ;  Walter  Brun's  pledges,  Robert  le  I3arun  of  la  Penne 
and  Walter  le  Carter  of  the  same,  William  Young,  and  Adam 
Walkelin'. 

972.  Richard  Sowyne  wounded  William  le  Deveneys  with  a 
certain  knife  {knipulo\  so  that  after  eight  days  he  died.  There- 
fore let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  harboured  at 
Northchiriton  without  tithing.  Therefore  the  township  is  in 
mercy. 

973.  Concerning  those  who  made  inquest  of  homicide,  they 
say  that  Richard  de  Wrotham  held  inquest  (^fecit  inquisicionevi) 
on  the  death  of  Walter  de  Cedra,  and  there  took  amercements 
for  defaults.     Therefore  to  judgment  upon  him. 

974.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Monte 
Acute,  the  Abbess  of  St.  Edward,  Robert  de  Mucengros. 
Reginald  Hose  of  Holebrok,  Henry  de  Godmanston',  Henry 
Bile  of  Chadelinche,  William  Pen  of  Wynkaulton,  and  Henry 
son  of  the  smith  of  Boyford  did  not  come  on  the  first  day. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Tintehull'*  comes  by  twelve. 

975.  Ralph  son  of  Matilda  de  Kingeston'  was  found  drowned 
in  the  water  of  Kingeston*.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not 
suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  And  because  he  was 
buried  without  view  of  the  coroners,  the  township  of  Kingeston' 
is  in  mercy. 

976.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  John  de  Burk',  Regi- 
nald le  Herd,  William  Sauser.  and  John  Turstam  did  not  come 
on  the  first  day.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

*  Sec  anU^  note  to  No.  912.     Sec  No.  943.  «  Tintinhol]. 

2    N 


274  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


The  Hundred  of  Hundesbergh^  comes  by  twelve. 

977.  Joel,  a  man  of  Walter  del  Brok,  fell  into  a  certain  stone 
quarry  so  that  he  was  killed.  Richard  Pres  was  the  first  finder, 
and  he  docs  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in 
mercy,  to  wit,  Baldwin  Frende  of  Stoke  and  Gilbert  Schet  of 
the  same.  [Joel]  was  buried  without  view  of  the  coroners. 
Therefore  the  township  of  Norton  is  in  mercy. 

978.  William  de  Bray  appealed  Reginald  de  Aumarle  of  the 
peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of  robbery,  and  he  does  not 
come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit, 
William  Coche  of  Cisselberg*  and  John  Serel  of  the  same. 
Reginald  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are 
not  agreed,  and  that  he  is  not  guilty.     Therefore  he  is  quit. 


Memb,  \gd. 

The  Hundred  of  Hundesbergh — continued. 

979.  Matilda  wife  of  Reginald  de  Odecumbe  appealed  Mey- 
nard  son  of  Osbert  le  Carter  for  that  he  beat  Reginald  her 
husband,  and  shamefully  treated  him.  Now  she  comes  and 
sues  against  him.  It  is  testified  that  Meynard  has  fled  for  that 
deed.  Therefore  his  tithing  is  in  mercy  for  the  flight,  to  wit,  the 
tithing  of  Robert  Pile  in  Hardington.  The  jurors  testify  that  the 
same  Maynard  beat  the  said  Reginald,  but  that  he  died  not  of 
that.     Therefore  he  may  return  if  he  will.* 

980.  John  de  Cinnok'  appealed  Augustin  de  Poghull  and 
Thomas  de  Ferariis  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King, 
and  robbery.  John  does  not  come.  Therefore  let  him  be  taken, 
and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Robert  le  Vautur  of  Monta- 
cute  and  Richard  de  Tintehuir.  Thomas  does  not  come.  He 
was  attached  by  William  de  Koker  and  William  Puddinge  of 
Suton'.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  Augustin  comes,  and  it  is 
testified  that  they  are  agreed,  and  that  Augustin  struck  him 
[John].     Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.     Afterwards  Augustin  comes 

^  Hounsborougb. 

'  We  must  infer  that  Matilda's  charge  was  that  Meynard  had  killed  her  husband, 
for  she  could  not  appeal  for  mere  chastisement  or  injury,  short  of  death  following 
therefrom.  The  appeal  fails,  because  the  jury  declare  that  Reginald  did  not  die 
because  he  was  beaten. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  275 


and  makes  fine  for  i  mark  by  plcdjjc  of  Thomas  de  Cirncestr* 
the  younger  and  Baldwin  de  Wayford. 

981.  Edith,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  de  Estcinnok, 
appealed  William  Mareys,  William  de  Glaunvill,  and  Malgerin 
the  servant  of  the  Archdeacon  of  Tanton',  of  the  death  of  her 
husband.  They  were  outlawed  upon  the  suit  of  Edith.  William 
le  Maris  was  not  in  tithing  because  a  free  man.  His  chattels, 
J2S.  ^d.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  William  Mareys 
had  land  and  meadow.  The  year  [and  a  day]  of  our  lord  the 
King  and  waste,  60J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.^ 
Because  Geoffry  de  Maundevill  had  that  land  and  meadow 
without  warrant  for  one  year,  and  had  thence  profit  to  the  value 
of  40J.,  he  is  in  mercy,  and  must  answer  therefor.  William  de 
Glenvill  and  Malgerin  were  of  the  mainpast  of  the  Archdeacon 
of  Taunton*,  who  is  dead.  Therefore,  nothing.  Afterwards 
comes  Helewisa  de  Maundevill'  and  made  fine  for  the  year  and 
waste  for  5  marks  by  pledge  of  William  de  Wydiworth  and 
William  de  Hewenberg. 

982.  Thomas  Rugecote  appealed  Augustin  de  Porthehull', 
Robert  his  brother,  Robert  le  Provur,  and  Stephen  le  Deveneys 
of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of  robbery.  Thomas  does 
not  come.  Therefore  let  him  be  taken,  and  his  pledges  to  prose- 
cute are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Adam  de  Hardington  and  Warin 
Teobald.  All  the  appellees  come,  and  the  jury  testify  that 
Augustin  and  Robert  le  Provur  are  not  guilty,  either  of  robbery 
or  beating.  Therefore  they  are  quit.  They  testify  that  Robert, 
brother  of  Augustin  and  Stephen,  are  guilty.  Therefore  the)' 
arc  in  mercy.  Let  them  be  in  custody.  And  because  the  jurors 
concealed  the  appeal  they  are  in  mercy.  Afterwards  the  said 
Robert  and  Stephen  made  fine  for  20s,  by  pledge  of  Thomas  de 
Cyrncestr'  the  younger  and  Baldwin  de  Wayford'. 

983.  Lady  Hawise  de  Sancto  Claro  broke  down  a  certain 
boundary  between  the  counties  of  Somerset  and  Dorset.  There- 
fore she  is  in  mercy.  The  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should 
cause  a  view  to  be  made  of  that  boundary  and  should  cause  it 
to  be  as  it  anciently  was. 

984.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  the  Abbot  of  Gresteng',* 

^  If  a  man  were  outlawed  or  convicted  of  felony,  and  he  held  land  otherwise  than 
from  the  King  himself,  the  latter  had  the  right  to  take  it  for  a  year  and  a  day  and  waste 
it,  before  it  actually  escheated  to  the  lord  of  whom  the  convicted  person  held.  (Glanv., 
Book  7,  ch.  17.)    Here  the  "601."  was  apparently  the  annual  value  of  the  land. 

'  Grestain. 


276  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

John  de  Gatesdoii',  Joan  Bruer,  William  Marescallus,  Hugh  de 
Ringdsim,  Robert  Lanceleve,  and  Robert  de  la  Ford*  did  not 
come  on  the  first  day.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Kinmersdon  comes  by  twelve. 

985.  Walter  Hareng'  found  a  man  dead  and  devoured  by 
dogs  in  the  wood  of  Millecumbe,  and  this  happened  in  the 
hundred  of  Wythstan,^  so  that  nothing  therein  pertains  to  this 
hundred  save  that  the  finder  was  of  this  hundred.  Therefore  • 
the  twelve  jurors  are  in  mercy.  And  let  inquiry  be  made  by  the 
hundred  when  [the  matter]  happened. 

986.  Robert  Warin  fell  into  a  certain  ditch,  so  that  his  neck 
was  broken.  No  one  i?  suspected.  No  Englishry ;  therefore 
murder. 

987.  Robert  Bernard  fled  to  the  church  of  Kinmersdon*, 
confessed  himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the  realm.  He  was  in 
the  tithing  of  Richard  Bukel.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He 
had  no  chattels. 

988.  Christiana  de  Teaumes  found  Alice  her  daughter  dead 
next  the  road  of  Mortuer.  She  does  not  come.  Therefore  she 
and  her  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  William  le  Frankeleyn  and 
E     .     .     .     d e  Teaumes. 

989.  Letice  de  Catteclive  appealed  EHas  de  Hull,  Richard  de 
Clopton,  Jordan  the  man  of  Richard  Cook  of  Merton,  of  rape 
and  robbery.  She  does  not  come,  and  she  has  no  pledges  to 
prosecute  beyond  her  faith.  None  of  the  appellees  corfie. 
Therefore  they  and  their  pledges  are  in  mercy.  Elias  was 
attached  by  W  .  .  .  de  Welweton*  and  Roger  the  miller  of 
the  same.  Richard  was  attached  by  John  de  Clopton  and 
Reginald  de  Norton.     Jordan  was  not  found. 

990.  Four  thieves  passed  through  the  hundred  of  Kin- 
mersdon' to  Cherelton,'  and  were  captured  and  beheaded.  It  is 
testified  that  they  were  taken  alive,  and  were  afterwards  beheaded 
without  warrant.  Therefore  they  who  beheaded  them  are  in 
mercy.  It  is  testified  by  the  jurors  that  Henry  de  Karevill,' 
Walter  Hundest  .  .  .  ,  and  Thomas  de  Kinmersdan*, 
Alfred  {Aivredus)  de  Lincol'  and  his  servant,  and  Michael  de 
Wauton'  were  at  the  beheading  of  the  four  men  ;  that  Henry  de 
Karevill  struck  one  of  them  in     ...     .     with  a  certain  lance 

^  Whiston.  ^  Charlton,  a  hamlcl  of  Kilcnersdon. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  277 

and  Michael  came  to  the  deed.  It  is  not  known,  and  it  is  not 
possible  to  prove,  whether  they  who  were  beheaded  were  lawful 
men  {fideles)  or  not.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy  who  were  at 
that  beheading.  Afterwards  came  Michael  de  Wauton'  and 
made  fine  for  5  marks  by  pledge  of  Gilbert  de  Welingdon, 
William  Fossard,  and  Al  .  .  .  de  Wauton*.  Afterwards 
it  is  testified  that  Aubrey  {Albredus)  de  Lincoln  was  not  at  the 
beheading,  but  that  one  Brun  his  vilator^  who  was  of  his  main- 
past,  cut  off  the  heads  of  two.  Therefore  Aubrey  is  in  mercy 
for  [his]  mainpast,  and  because  he  did  not  take  him.  He  made 
fine  for  30  marks  by  pledge  of  Richard  de  Langeford,  William 
de  Bykeleng',  Ralph  son  of  Bernard,  Robert  de  Midelton', 
Laurence  son  of  Robert,  and  William  de  Hewenb     .     .     . 

991.  Ranulf  son  of  the  miller  of  Radestok  appealed  Nicholas 
the  chaplain  of  Kinemersdon  of  the  death  of  Nicholas  his 
brother,  and  as  accessory  he  appealed  Robert  Spark*.  Nicholas 
the  chaplain  comes,  and  he  cannot  answer  (non  potest  respondete) 
in  a  lay  court.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty,  but  that 
Robert  Spark'  killed  him,  [the  appellor's  brother].  Therefore  let 
him  [Robert]  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Likewise  Robert  de 
Inglescumbe  is  guilty  of  that  death.  Therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  Robert  Spark'  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Philip  Godman  of  Kinmersdon*.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
Robert  de  Inglescumbe  was  of  the  mainpast  of  Robert  de  Gant. 
Therefore  he  [Robert  de  Gant]  is  in  mercy.  Let  Ranulf  be  in 
custody  for  his  false  appeal.  He  made  fine  for  20s,  by  pledge 
of  E  .  .  .  de  la  Cumbe,  John  de  Ponte,  and  William 
Folcard'.' 

992.  Malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Robert  Schorlac  of 
Himingdon.'*  The  township  of  [Him]ington  did  not  raise  the  hue. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

993.  Richard  Bukel  and  Ilebert  Wytinge,  accused  of  larceny 
and  receiving,  come  and  defend  everj'thing,  and  put  themselves 
upon  the  country  and  the  nearest  four  townships  for  good  and  ill. 
[The  jurors  and  the  townships]  testify  that  they  are  not  guilty. 
Therefore  they  are  quit. 

'  Qwrrey  Is  this  equivalent  to  villicuSy  an  overseer  or  steward  ? 

^  Kanull  appealed  the  wrong  man  as  principal,  and  suffers  accordingly.  Another 
criminal,  Robert  de  Inglescumln?,  is  brought  in  by  the  indictment  of  the  jury.  Hubert 
Spark  and  his  fellow  Kolx:rt  have  evidently  fled. 

^  llemingion. 


278  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

994.  Alice  wife  of  William  Cade  fell  dead  in  the  way  as  she 
went  towards  Chyuton',  and  on  account  of  this  William  her 
husband  has  fled,  and  left  behind  him  chattels  to  the  value  of 
8^.,  for  which  the  sheriff"  must  answer.  And  because  the  said 
husband  is  not  suspected,  let  him  return  if  he  will. 

995.  Benedict  de  Cardigan  appealed  John  de  Torin,  Andrew 
de  Aungers,  Stephen  de  Caun  .  .  ,  and  Robert  de  Tenesford* 
of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  Alexander  de 
Munford  for  inciting,  and  he  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and 
his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Richard  Bruce  of 
Cherlton  and  Gilbert  Cule  of  the  same.  The  jurors  testify  that 
[the  parties  are  not]  agreed,  nor  are  [the  appellees]  guilty. 
Therefore  they  are  quit. 

996.  William  Hayward  of  Kinmersdon*  appealed  the  afore- 
said John,  Andrew,  Stephen,  and  Robert  of  breach  of  the  peace  of 
our  lord  the  King,  and  Andrew  de  Munford  for  inciting,  and  he 
does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are 
in  mercy,  to  wit,  Gilbert  de  la  Ford  and  Robert  Meles.  All  the 
appealed  come,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  are  not  agreed, 
nor  guilty.     Therefore  they  are  quit. 

997.  Michael  son  of  Walter  de  Kinmersdon'  appealed 
Alexander  de  Munford  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the 
King.  Michael  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges 
to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Richard  le  Tailur  and  .  .  . 
Nuert*.  Alexander  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the 
parties]  are  not  agreed,  and  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he 
is  quit 

998.  Walter  son  of  Luwin  de  Kinmersdon*  appealed  Thomas 
the  Hayward  of  Wei  we  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the 
King.  Walter  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Hugh  .  .  and  Theynewin 
Crede.  Thomas  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  .... 
Therefore  he  is  quit. 

Memb.  20. 
The  Hundred  of  Kinmersdon' — continued. 

999.  Concerning  suits  of  the  hundred  [courts],  they  say  that 
Melles,  a  manor  of  the  Abbot  of  Glaston*,  was  wont  to  do  suit 
{sequt)  at  the  hundred  [court]  of  Kinmersdon',  at  the  sheriff**s 
tourn  (ad  turnum  vicecomitis\  and  to  give  \2d,  at  each  time  (fld 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  279 


quamlibet  termtnum).  And,  moreover,  the  men  of  the  fiianor  do 
not  allow  the  King's  bailiffs  to  enter  upon  their  lands,  and  now 
do  not  come ;  therefore  to  judgment. 

1000.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Roger  Syfrewast, 
John  de  Curtenay,  Walter  de  Falclond*,  John  son  of  the  clerk 
(?  Lecld)^  Roger  de  Bocles,  William  de  Toren',  Margery  daughter 
of  Robert  de  Gurn[ay],  Geoffry  de  Karevill,  Alan  de  Walton, 
the  Abbot  of  Keynsham,  Walter  Suthovere,  and  Richard  de 
Bradelegh'  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Whytston^  comes  by  twelve. 

1 00 1.  Geoffry  Russel  appealed  Geoffry  the  draper  (dra- 
pariuni)  of  Brideport  for  that  he,  on  Sunday  next  after  the 
feast  of  St.  James,  in  the  26th  year,  came  to  him  at  the  house  of 
Robert  de  Columbariis  and  broke  the  door  of  the  hall,  and  with 
a  certain  hatchet  cut  off  the  index  finger  of  his  left  hand  and 
took  from  him  in  robbery  a  knife  and  one  belt  of  the  value 
of  4^1,  and  one  surcoat  {supertunicavi)  of  the  value  {precii)  of 
4^..  and  one  sword  {enscvi)  of  the  value  of  4//. ;  and  that  he  did 
this  wickedly  and  feloniously  and  in  premeditated  assault  and 
against  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  he  offers  to  deraign 
against  him  as  a  man  mayhemed*  {sic^  homo  maheniatus).  And 
he  says  that  there  were  with  him  [the  draper]  many  others.' 
Geoffry  [the  draper]  comes  and  defends  everything  word  for 
word,  and  says  that  if  the  said  Ralph  {sic)  Russel  should  make 
sufficient  suit  by  what  he  may  be  able  and  ought  to  put  to  law 
i^poni  ad  legem),  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country  that  he  never 
mayhemed  him  or  robbed  him  as  is  said. 

John  de  Wathdon'  appealed  the  same  Geoffry  for  that  at  the 
same  day  and  hour  he  was  in  the  hall,  and  Geoffry  came  to  him 
and  broke  the  door  of  the  hall  and  badly  beat  him  and  took 
from  him  in  robbery  a  bow  and  twenty-three  arrows  of  the 
value  of  12//.;  and  of  the  chattels  of  his  [John's]  lord,  which 
were    in    his    charge,  he    took    from    him    one    leather  jacket* 

'  Whistone. 

*  A  man  who  is  mayhemed  is  not  bound  to  offer  the  duel,  and  in  that  c«sc  the 
appellee  necessarily  has  to  put  himself  upon  the  testimony  of  the  country.  Bract., 
fo.  142b. 

^  This  is  the  only  mention  so  far  of  the  accessories  who  seem  to  have  been  al»o 
appealed.     See  infra, 

^  Sec  nuie  to  No.  569.     Plate  armour  was  not  in  use  at  this  early  d^tc 


28o  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLE^S. 

{loricam)K){  the  value  of  12^.,  and  one  hauberk  of  the  value  of 
los.^  and  two  turkish  coifs  {cot/as  turcosiasY  of  the  value  of  2s, 
and  one  scapulary  {chalonetn)  and  two  shirts  {duo  linteani)  of 
the  value  of  6^.,  and  one  coverlet  (coopertoriuvi)  of  the  value  of 
40J.,  and  one  {cJram)  of  the  value  of  40$".,  and  one  russet  robe 
{unant  robam  de  rubeto)  of  the  value  of  /^os,  4^/.,  and  one  sword 
of  the  value  of  10^.,  and  that  this  he  did  against  the  peace  of 
our  lord  the  King,  wickedly  and  feloniously  and  in  premeditated 
assault,  he  offers  to  deraign  by  his  body  as  the  court  shall  con- 
sider. Geoffry  comes  and  defends  everything  word  for  word,  and 
puts  himself  upon  the  country. 

John  de  Piddle  appealed  the  same  Geoffry  for  that  at  the 
same  day  and  hour  he  was  in  the  hall,  and  there  he  [Geoffry] 
wounded  him  with  a  certain  lance  above  the  hollow  of  the  foot 
{supra  kivellum  pedis^)^  and  took  from  him  in  robbery  one 
surcoat  and  a  bow  and  twenty-three  arrows  of  the  value  of  4^^., 
and  that  this  he  did  against  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King, 
wickedly  and  feloniously  and  in  premeditated  assault,  he  offers 
to  deraign  by  his  body  as  the  court  shall  consider.  Geoffry  comes 
and  defends  everything,  etc.,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country. 

Afterwards  came  Geoffry  Russel,  John  de  Whitdon',  and 
John  de  Piddle,  and  withdrew  themselves.  Therefore  they  and 
their  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy.  It  is  testified  that  they 
are  agreed.  Therefore  Geoffry  de  Brideport  and  all  the  appellees* 
are  in  mercy.  Afterwards  came  Geoffry,  John  and  John  the 
appellors,  and  made  fine  for  themselves  and  their  pledges  for  5 
marks,  by  pledge  of  Gilbert  de  Lauwerton,  William  de  Paris,  and 
Robert  de  Bosco.  Afterwards  came  Walter  brother  of  Geoffry 
de  Bridport,  and  all  the  appealed  as  accessories,  and  made  fine 
for  10  marks  by  pledge  of  Walter  Gervays  of  Brideport,  Peter  le 
Border,  Ernisius  de  Dunhcved,  and  William  la  Ware.* 

1002.  Elys  son  of  Jul'  Penard  fell  from  a  horse,  so  that  he 
died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of 
the  horse  2s.^  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

'  Probably  coifs  of  mail  brought  from  the  East. 

'  At  first  I  tho'ipht  th's  was  meant  for  cavdlam  ;  cavilla,  the  ankle.  See  Martin, 
Gloss.  ;  but  probably  **  kivilltim  "  stands  {ox cavilcuiy  **a  hollow  place"  :  Ainsworth  s 
Diet. 

'  All  parties  would  be  in  diflficuliies  for  compromising  without  leave. 

*  These  appeals  perhaps  grew  out  of  the  matter  which  forms  the  subject  of  No.  569. 
ante.  Lamiat  is  in  this  hundred,  and  is  perhaps  the  place  rclfrr^d  to  in  No.  569  as 
Lamieton. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  28 1 

1003.  John  de  Westden'  was  crushed  to  death  by  a  door 
which  fell  upon  him.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misad- 
venture. Price  of  the  door  12^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

1004.  John  son  of  Edith  de  Bichenstok'  was  found  drowned 
in  the  water  of  Alom.  No  one  is  suspected.  No  Englishry  ; 
therefore  murder. 

1005.  Richard  Bithewaye  was  drowned  from  a  certain  mare 
in  the  fishpond  of  Evenbergh*.  No  one  is  suspected.  There- 
fore, misadventure.  Price  of  the  mare  3^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1006.  John  Sturi  of  Almeton'  was  crushed  to  death  beneath 
the  wheel  of  a  cart.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadven- 
ture. Price  of  the  cart  and  oxen  and  of  the  crop  which  was  in 
the  cart  34.^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1007.  Malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Gilbert  de  Mere  and 
wounded  him.  Walter  le  Schir  .  .  .  and  William  Ic  Webb 
of  Weir,  arrested  for  this,  come  and  defend  everything,  and  put 
themselves  upon  the  country  and  the  four  nearest  townships. 
The  jurors  and  the  four  townships  testify  that  Walter  and  William 
came  by  night  to  Gilbert's  house  and  broke  his  hedge  (fiayam 
suani)  and  the  wood  of  his  house  (boscum  doinus  sue)y  and 
wounded  Gilbert  in  the  belly  and  the  shm  so  that  his  life  was 
despaired  of,  and  all  this  was  because  of  a  certain  dispute  on  the 
day  preceding  the  death  concerning  a  debt  of  3^.  which  they 
owed  him.     Therefore ^ 

1008.  Benedict  de  Gloucester  and  Dyonisia  his  wife  fled  to 
the  church  of  East  Pennard,  confessed  themselves  thieves,  and 
abjured  the  realm.  The  township  of  East  Pennard  did  not  make 
pursuit.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1009.  Eustace  de  Cantebrig*,  accused  of  burglary  and 
larceny,  comes  and  defends  everything,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country  and  the  four  nearest  townships.  The  jurors  and  the  four 
townships  testify  that  he  is  guilty.  Therefore  ....  Eustace's 
chattels,  1 5^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

I  QIC.  Richard  the  clerk  of  Dunhcved  appealed  Richard 
Young  of  Legh  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of  wounds 
and  robbery.  Richard  does  not  come.  Therefore  let  him  be 
taken,  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  10  wit,  Osbert 

'  There  is  no  judgment  beyond  the  note  in  the  margin  that  they  are  to  be  taken 
into  custody. 

2   O 


282  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

le  Chynet  of  Dunheved  and  .  .  .  the  miller  of  the  same. 
Richard  Young  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties] 
are  not  agreed,  but  that  ....  [he,  Young  struck  ?  ]  him  on 
the  head.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy  ;  let  him  be  in  custody. 
Afterwards  Richard  Young  came  and  made  fine  for  ^  mark  by 
pledge  of  Robert  de  Dicheshayt  and  Nicholas  de  Nuers. 

loii.  Simon  le  Waleys  appealed  in  the  county  [court]  John 
de  la  Pitte  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and  of  robbery.  .  . 
[Simon]  comes,  and  docs  not  sue  against  him  [as  he]  first 
appealed.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody. 
John  comes  and  ....  *  that  he  beat  and  disgracefully 
treated  him.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody. 
Afterwards  Simon  came  ....  [and  made  fine]  for  ^  mark 
by  pledge  of  Emisius  de  Dunheved.  Afterwards  came  John  de 
la  Puto  ....  by  pledge  of  Osbert  the  reeve  of  la  Legh  and 
Richard  de  la  Clive. 

1012.  William  Balle  appealed  in  the  county  [court]  Robert 
de  Wylteshir'  of  the  peace,  etc.,  and  robbery.  And  William 
comes  and  does  not  sue  against  him  [as  he]  first  appealed. 
Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody.  Robert 
comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he 
is  quit.  John'  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  appeal.  Afterwards 
William  came  and  made  fine  for  ^  mark  by  pledge  of  Ernisius 
de  Dunheved. 

1013.  Roger  de  Wyka  appealed  John  Mangne  of  the  peace, 
etc.,  and  robbery.  Roger  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Richard  the  reeve  of 
Dunheved  and  Richard  le  Busselar  of  the  same.  The  jurors 
testify  that  they  are  not  agreed,  but  that  John  is  guilty  of  beating. 
Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Afterwards  came  ....  and  made 
fine  for  los,  by  pledge  of  Robert  the  Frenchman  and  Samuel  de 
Melles. 

To  the  foot  of  this  membrane  there  is  stitched  a  fragment  of  parchment,  the  writing 
upon  which  is  almost  lost. 

IOI4. 
This  entry  apparently  relates  to  an  intnision  made  by  men  of  William  de  Paris, 
of  whom  one  was  William  de  Gillingham,  by  night  upon  some  land  at  Bone  ham,  where 
they  cut  down  three  ash  trees  and  an  oak.  1  he  jurors  of  the  hundreds  of  Whystan, 
Catesasse,  Bruyton,  Frome,  and  Hawthurn',  seem  to  be  occupied  in  the  matter,  and 
s  me  one  pays  the  considerable  fine  of  20  marks  by  pledge  of  GcofTry  de  Mareys  rjid 
others. 

^  Perhaps  the  words  that  arc  here  illegible  mean  that  the  jury  say  thi^ 
^  This  is  a  slip  for  William. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  283 

Memb,  2od. 

The  Hundred  of  Whytstan' — continued. 

1015.  Richard  son  of  Edward  appealed  William  Magne  in  the 
county  [court]  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and  of  beating 
and  robbery.  Richard  comes,  and  does  not  sue  against  him  as 
he  first  appealed  {non  sequitur  versus  eum  sicut  cum  prima 
appellavit^).  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody. 
William  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  he  beat  [Richard]  as 
he  appeals.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody. 
Afterwards  Richard  came  and  made  fine  for  \  mark  by  pledge 
of  Ernibius  de  Dunhevcd.  Afterwards  William  Magne  came 
and  made  fine  for  \os,  by  pledge  of  the  said  Robert  and  Samuel. 

1016.  John  Patrik  appealed  Robert  de  Wylteschir'*  of  the 
peace,  etc.,  and  robbery.  John  does  not  come.  Therefore  he 
and  his  *  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  John  de 
Bradewey  and  John  le  Thike.  Robert  comes,  and  the  jurors 
testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are  not  agreed,  and  that  he 
[Robert]  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he  is  quit.  Afterwards  John 
Patrick  came  and  made  fine  for  himself  for  \  mark  by  pledge 
of  the  same  Ernisius  de  Dunheved. 

1017.  Thomas  le  Pen  was  taken  and  imprisoned  at  Dunheved* 
by  the  men  of  Nicholas  de  Dunheved,  and  he  was  detained 
against  gage  and  pledge  and  against  the  bailiff  of  the  hun- 
dred. After  that  the  bailiff  was  ordered  in  the  county  [court] 
that  he  should  deliver  him,  but  the  men  of  the  same  Nicholas 
raised  a  certain  drawbridge  {pontem  turnaicium)  so  that  the 
bailiff  should  not  enter.  The  bailiff  then  raised  the  hue  and 
withdrew.  And  because  it  is  witnessed  that  Nicholas  Dunheved 
detained  him  against  gage  and  pledge  after  one  Samuel  de 
Melles  would  have  given  gage  and  would  have  found  pledge  to 
show  that  he  [Thomas]  was  his  man,  therefore  to  judgment  on 
him.  Let  him  be  in  custody.  Afterwards  Nicholas  came  and 
made  fine  for  40^.  by  pledge  of  Ernisius  de  Dunheved  and 
William  Haket 

1018.  The  jurors  present  that  Henry  de  Kamel  obstructed  a 
certain  road  near  the  mill  of  Batecumbe.*  Therefore  he  is  in 
mercy.  The  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  view  the  road  and 
amend  it. 

i 

*  I  <o  extend  **  no  seq*  iPsus  eu  sii  eu  pmo  ap/it" 

•  Cf,  No.  1012.  »  Do>Knhead.  *  Batcombe. 


284  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

1019.  William  la  Ware  complains  that  Benedict  de  Brenton, 
together  with  Robert  de  Clivedon,  Ralph  the  carpenter,  and  James 
de  Middelton  entered  his  garden  and  took  his  apples  and  beat 
him  ;  but  because  that  matter  was  not  attached  in  the  county 
[court],  and  moreover  [because]  Benedict,  who  is  present,  is  not 
guilty,  William  is  in  mercy. 

1020.  Osbcrt  de  la  Bergh',  Peter  de  la  Mare,  John,  de  Hen- 
leghe,  Adam  Black  {rtigcr)  of  la  Strete,  Adam  le  Wyse  of 
Jottesham,  Blakeman  de  Lottcsliam,  Walter  le  Trichur  of  la 
Stane,  Alexander  de  Linham,  Juliana  Dore,  and  Robert  son  of 
Richard  the  Frenchman,  accused  of  larceny,  come  and  defend 
everything,  and  put  themselves  upon  the  country  and  the  four 
nearest  townships  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  testify  that  Peter 
de  la  Mare,  John  de  Henlcgh,  Osbert  de  la  Bergh*,  Adam  Black 
of  la  Strete,  Blakeman  de  Lottesham,  Alexander  de  Linham, 
Walter  le  Trichur,  and  Juliana  Dore  are  not  guilty.  Therefore 
they  are  quit.  It  is  testified  that  Adam  le  Wyse  and  Robert  son 
of  Richard  are  guilty.  Therefore,  etc.^  Adam's  chattels,  lOJ., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  The  chattels  of  Robert  le 
Fraunceys,  14J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

The  Hundred  of  Melles  comes  by  six. 

102 1.  Malefactors  came  to  the  house  of  W^illiam  de  la  Clive, 
and  when  they  were  perceived  they  fled.  It  is  not  known  who 
they  were,  but  Walter  Puleyn  is  suspected,  as  appears  elsewhere 
in  the  hundred  of  Ceddre.* 

1022.  Clarice  de  la  Clive  was  drowned  in  the  water  of 
Fobbcster'.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  And 
because  the  jurors  testify  that  view  was  made  by  other  coroner 
than  he  who  made  view,  they  are  in  mercy  for  false  presentation. 

1023.  Richard  de  la  Legh  appealed  John  de  la  W^air  and 
Philip  servant  to  Richard  de  la  \\'air.  Richard  comes  and  sues 
against  them.  John  docs  not  come.  He  was  attached  by 
Osbcrt  Russel  and  John  de  la  Barwe.  Therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  arc  in  mercy.  Philip  was  attached  by  William  Siward' 
and  John  de  la  Wode.  therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in 
mercy.     It  is  testified  that  there  is  no  agreement      Therefore 

^  There  is  a  marginal  note  *'  C^  '* — custodiatur  or  custodiantur^  which  must  refer  to 
Adam  and  Kol«rt. 

*  Sec  No.  7S8  suprcL. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  285 

— c 

Richard  is  told  that  he  should  sue  against  him  in  the  county 
[court]  until,  etc.* 

1024.  Osbert  son  of  Maurice  the  miller  of  Ludewell.  concern- 
ing whom  it  was  said  that  he  was  with  evildoers  in  Selewood' 
who  took  him  and  by  force  detained  [him],  was  soon  after  taken 
and  delivered  to  the  gaol  at  Yvelcestr*  in  the  time  of  Jordan 
Oliver,'  and  it  is  not  known  how  he  was  liberated ;  but  because 
he  has  withdrawn  himself,  therefore  his  tithing  is  in  mercy,  to 
wit,  the  tithing  of  Melles.  And  because  he  is  not  suspected  let 
him  return  if  he  will. 

1025.  John  de  Melles  appealed  Hugh  he  Hogeford'  for  that 
on  Wednesday  next  after  the  feast  of  St.  Andrew,  in  the  27th 
year,  he  [Hugh]  collected  John's  goods  into  his  chamber  and 
would  carry  them  off  and  attempted  to  break  into  a  certain 
chest,  and  when  he  was  surprised  Hugh  wounded  him  [John]  and 
struck  him  on  the  head  and  mouth  so  that  he  lost  a  tooth,  and 
that  this  he  did  against  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King  wickedly 
and  feloniously  he  offers  to  deraign  as  a  man  who  has  passed 
age.^  He  says  that  when  this  was  done  Hugh  was  his  servant 
and  in  his  house.  Hugh  comes  and  defends  everything,  etc.,  and 
puts  himself  upon  the  country.  The  jurors  testify  that  there 
was  a  dispute  between  them  because  Hugh  had  ploughed  certain 
other  land  than  that  which  he  was  ordered  to  plough,  and  John 
threatened  him.  On  this  account  Hugh  wished  to  leave  John's 
service,  and  took  his  own  clothes  {pannos  suos  proprios)^  and 
because  John  would  not  allow  him  to  leave,  Hugh  struck  John 
on  the  head  with  a  club.  But  John  lost  no  tooth,  nor  did  Hugh 
attempt  to  carry  off  John's  goods  as  John  appeals  him.  Because 
Hugh  struck  him  on  the  head  he  is  in  mercy.  Likewise  John 
is  in  mercy  for  his  false  appeal.  Afterwards  Hugh  came  and 
made  fine  for  I  mark  by  pledge  of  Richard  le  Lung,  Sampson  de 
Heydon,  and  John  de  Lysun  ;  and  John  came  and  made  fine  for 
\  mark  by  pledge  of  Samuel  de  Melles. 

1026.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  Peytevin, 
Henry  Suthovere,  and  John  Mart,  parson  of  Aure,  did  not  come 
on  the  first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1  uniil,  that  is,  outlawry.  The  record  does  not  say  expressly  that  Philip  did  not 
come,  but  the  inference  is  clear  that  he  did  not. 

*  The  sheriff. 

'  An  appellor  who  has  '*  passed  the  age ''  was  not  bound  to  offer  battle.  The  age 
seems  to  have  been  sixty  years :  Bract.,  fo.  138b  and  fo.  142b. 


286  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


The  Hundred  of  Frome  comes  by  twelve. 

1027.  John  son  of  William  Futsadame  was  attached  that 
he  should  come  before  the  justices  on  account  of  a  certain 
burglary  which  was  made  at  the  house  of  William  his  father. 
He  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy, 
to  wit,  Richard  Chesecrume  and  Robert  Tumbak*.  And  because 
the  township  of  la  Rode  did  not  make  pursuit  [after  the 
burglars]  it  is  in  mercy. 

1028.  Malefactors  killed  William  Plente  at  the  house  of 
Herward  Rick*.  It  is  not  known  who  they  were.  No  Englishry  ; 
therefore  murder.  The  tithing  of  the  Abbot  of  Cimcestr*  in 
Tyderington'  did  not  make  pursuit     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1029.  Elyas  de  Wales  killed  Robert  Coppe,  and  fled.  There- 
fore let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  No  Englishry  ;  there- 
fore murder.  He  [Elyas]  was  in  the  tithing  of  Edward  de 
Wodheved  of  Frome ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels, 
32^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Hugh  de  Bristold', 
John  de  Bathon*,  and  William  le  Buter  are  suspected  of  that 
death.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  They 
were  not  in  tithing,  nor  had  they  chattels,  for  they  were 
strangers. 

1030.  Malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  Ralph  Leundi  of 
Waundestr'  and  killed  Matilda,  Ralphs  daughter.  Agnes, 
Matilda's  mother,  was  then  present,  and  the  jurors  falsely  pre- 
sented the  finder.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

103 1.  Walter  son  of  Hubert  fell  from  a  certain  oak,  so 
that  he  died.  No  one  is  sus[>ected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  oak  6^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1032.  Malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  the  chaplain  of 
Clasford.*  It  i>  not  known  who  thev  were.  And  because  .  . 
.  .  [the  township]  of  Clasford  did  not  make  pursuit,  it  is  in 
mercv. 

1033.  .  .  .  de  Xuni  appealed  Henr}-  son  of  Alexander 
de  Munfort  and  Robert  de  Tomi  of  felonv  and  breach  of  the 
peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and  wounds,  and  they  come.  Upon 
this  came  the  ofllcial  of  the  Archdeacon  [?  of  Taunton,  and  said] 
that  they  were  clerks,  and  cLiims  to  have  them  in  the  spiritual 
court  to  stand  to  right     And     .     .     .* 

1034.  Malefactors  burgled  [the  house]  of  Gilbert  Harcng'  in 

1  WaBStiow.  <  Cloford.  >  The  rest  is  iUcgiblc 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  28/ 

Nuni.^     It  is  not  known  who  they  were.     And  because  the  town- 
ship of    .     .     .     did  not  make  pursuit,  it  is  in  mercy. 

Upon  the  back  of  the  fragment  of  parchment  pi-eviously  referred  to  is  an  entry 
almost  illegible.     So  far  as  it  can  be  deciphered  it  is  as  follows  : — 

1035.  [These  are]  the  coroners  in  this  county  :  William  de 
Parys,  Geoffry  .  .  .  ,  Jordan  la  Warre,  Gilbert  de  .  .  . 
,     .     for   that Matthew  de  Clivedin    ,     .     .     is 

•     •    •     • 

Memb,  21. 

The  Hundred  of  Frome— continued. 

1036.  Touching  escheats,  they  say  that  Richard  de  Sancta 
Mora  holds  one  knight*s  fee  in  la  Rade  of  Ralph  Russcl,  which 
was  formerly  an  escheat  of  the  Norman  lands.*  It  is  testified 
that  our  lord  King  John  gave  that  land  to  John  Russel,  his 
[Ralph's]  father. 

1037.  The  jurors  present  that  Richard  de  Wrotham  made 
inquest  touching  the  death  of  Walter  de  Ceddre  his  servant,  and 
took  amercements  for  defaults.     Therefore  to  judgment. 

1038.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  John  de  Fluri, 
Katharine  de  Monte  Acuto,  William  de  Radene,  Nicholas  de 
Sancta  Mora,  Alexander  de  Munford,  John  de  la  Wegford*, 
Reginald  de  Aubcmare,  James  Hose.  Robert  le  Sauser,  Roger  de 
Radene,  John  de  Torney,  John  Bacun,  Adam  Alunold,  John  the 
goldsmith  {Aurifaber),  William  Adelleline,  William  de  la  Purie, 
William  le  Turnur,  and  Amabel  Michel  did  not  come  on  the 
first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Catessasse  comes  by  twelve. 

103Q.  A  boar-pig  killed  a  certain  boy  who  fell  into  his  stye 
(Jnircelius  occidit  quandam  puenan  qui  jaaiit  in  cinis  suis).  No 
one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  pig 
\2d.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1040.  Malefactors  burgled  the  house  of  John  the  Palmer  of 
Babbekari.'  It  is  not  known  who  they  were.  Clarice,  John's 
wife,  was  suffocated.  John  her  husband,  the  first  finder,  comes, 
and  is  not  suspected.  The  jurors  falsely  presented  the  finder. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

*  Nunney. 

'  These  were  the  possessions  of  Normans  winch  were  seized  into  the  hand  of  the 
King,  Heniy  III.,  on  the  scj>arauon  of  Normandy  from  England.  *  Babcary. 


288  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

1041.  Gilbert  the  miller  was  crushed  by  the  mill-wheel,  so 
that  he  died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  wheel  2J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1042.  One  William  de  Ayscote  was  a  guest  in  the  house  of 
John  Sene  of  Limin',  and  in  the  night  he  killed  John  and  Avice 
his  wife.  No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder.  It  is  testified  that 
William  was  hanged  in  Devon.  Because  William  de  Assche, 
Gilbert  Sene,  Richard  del  Assche,  and  Geoflfry  Peydias  falsely 
represented  themselves  to  be  kinsmen  [of  the  slain],  they  are  in 
mercy.  They  made  fine  for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  Richard  le 
Venur  and  Geoffry  de  Limington.  The  jurors  falsely  presented 
Englishry  upon  their  roll.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  The 
township  of  Lemington'  did  not  present  Englishry  at  the  county 
[court].     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1043.  Henry  the  Clerk  of  Kari  hanged  himself  in  his  house. 
Edith  his  daughter,  who  first  found  him,  comes,  and  is  not 
suspected.  Judgment,  felonia  de  se.  His  chattels,  ys,  7^.,  for 
which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1044.  Henry  son  of  Emclot,  arrested  upon  suspicion  of 
larceny,  comes  and  defends  everything,  and  puts  himself  upon 
the  country  and  the  four  nearest  townships  for  good  and  ill. 
The  jurors  testify  that  he  was  at  the  burgling  of  the  house  of 
Adam  le  Foteri,  and  that  he  is  guilty  of  other  deeds.  There- 
fore, etc.*     His  chattels,  4?.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1045.  Nicholas  son  of  Martin,  Henry  his  brother,  and  Richard 
Ruffus,  arrested  for  larceny,  come  and  defend  everything.  The 
jury  testify  that  they  are  not  guilty.     Therefore  they  are  quit. 

1046.  The  jurors  present  that  a  third  part  of  one-half  of  the 
tithing  of  Berton'  was  wont  to  do  suit  at  the  hundred  [court] 
of  our  lord  the  King  of  Catcssa^se,  and  that  suit  was  withdrawn 
by  J.  Bishop  of  Bath,  and  now  [they]  make  suit  at  the  hundred 
[court]  of  the  Abbot  of  Glaston  of  Wytstan,  and  it  is  not  known 
by  what  warrant.     Therefore  this  must  be  discussed. 

1047.  The  jurors  present  that  the  tithing  of  Berwe  was  wont 
to  do  suit  at  the  hundred  [court]  of  Catessasse  when  our  lord 
the  King  crossed  into  Gascony,  and  ever  since  [the  suit]  has 
been  withdrawn  by  Geoffry  de  Wuhvard*.  Therefore  it  must  be 
discussed. 

1048.  Concerning  ladies  (dominabus),  they  say  that  Hawise, 
wife  of  Nicholas  de  Moles,  was  in  the  gift  of  our  lord  the  King, 

^  The  nur^^inal  note  sa)s  that  he  is  to  be  hanged. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  289 

and  our  lord  the  King  who  now  is  gave  her  to  Nicholas.     Her 
land  in  this  hundred  is  worth  i^22.     Therefore  to  judgment.^ 

1049.  Thomas  Dun  of  Berton,  William  son  of  Adam  the 
chaplain  of  Northbcrwe,^  and  Laurence  son  of  Marker,  accused 
of  larceny,  fled.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
Thomas  was  in  tithing  in  Berton*  in  this  hundred.  Therefore 
it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  2J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer.  William  was  not  in  tithing,  but  he  was  received  at 
Langeport  without  tithing.  Therefore  it  [the  township]  is  in 
mercy.  Laurence  was  not  in  tithing,  but  was  received  at 
Halton'  in  the  hundred  of  Whyteleg*.  Therefore  it  [the  town- 
ship] is  in  mercy.     He  had  no  chattels. 

1050.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Dolond  de  Vall[ibus], 
John  de  Travers,  Geoffry  de  Wlward,  Nicholas  de  Moles,  and 
the  Prior  of  Bermundes'  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  There- 
fore they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Sterte  comes  by  six. 

1051.  They  say  nothing  but  what  should  be  said  before  [/>., 
by  the  hundred]. 

The  Hundred  of  Coker  comes  by  twelve. 

1052.  Part  of  a  crop  {quidam  pars  bladt)  fell  upon  Edith 
daughter  of  Mariota,  so  that  she  was  pressed  to  death.  No  one 
is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  crop  2j., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1053.  John  Cubille  appealed  Hugh  de  la  Hyele,  Thomas  de 
Chaldewell,  and  Robert  Wygod  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the 
King  and  of  wounds.  John  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and 
his  pledge  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  namely,  Ralph  Pegge  of 
Chatikyol  in  the  county  of  Dorset.  Let  him  be  taken.*  All 
the  appellees  come,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  are  not  agreed 
nor  guilty.     Therefore  they  are  quit. 

1054.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Geoffry  de  Maunde- 
viir,  Cecily  lady  of  Suton*,  Robert  de  Gredehe  .  .  ,  Robert 
le  Bridd',  Petronilla  de  la  Lude,  William  Burel,  and  Girard  dc 

^  I  cannot  explain  why  these  three  words  were  added.    The  roll  is  perfectly  clear. 

'  North  Barrow. 

'  This  refers  to  John.  In  the  original  it  is  inserted  immediately  before  the  phnae 
beginning  with  ''namely.'*  Probably  the  clerk  wrote  "^i^"  and  then  remembcrail 
that  he  had  not  named  John's  pledge  as  he  ought  to  do. 


290  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Esse  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.     Therefore   they  are   in 
mercy. 

The  Manor  de  Monte  Acuto  comes  by  six. 

1055.  Cecily  daughter  of  Alfred  de  Halton  appealed  Walter 
de  Stantellum  of  rape.  She  does  not  come,  nor  had  she  any 
pledge  to  prosecute  except  by  [her]  faith.  Walter  comes,  and 
the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are  agreed.  Therefore 
Walter  is  in  mercy.  Afterwards  Walter  came  and  made  fine 
for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  Walter  Luvering'  and  Robert  le 
Waugtr. 

1056.  Emma  Corbin'  appealed  Ralph  le  Prior  of  Soc^  of  rape, 
and  she  does  not  come,  nor  had  she  any  pledge  to  prosecute 
except  by  [her]  faith.  Ralph  does  not  come,  nor  was  he 
attached.  And  because  the  jurors  call  him  Ralph  and  he  is 
called  Robert,  they  all  are  in  mercy. 

1057.  Clarice  de  Odecumbc  appealed  William  the  miller  of 
Monte  Acuto  for  that  he  had  connexion  with  her  and  deflowered 
her  {concubi'nijvit  cum  ea  et  earn  defloravit\  and  because  she  docs 
not  speak  in  words  by  which  she  may  put  to  law,  let  inquiry, 
etc  William  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty, 
and  that  she  appealed  him  by  the  instigation  of  her  mother. 
Therefore  let  her  be  committed  to  gaol,  and  William  is  quit.* 

1058.  Concerning  wines  sold  against  the  assize,  they  say 
that  Robert  de  la  Sale  has  sold  wine  contrar}'  to  the  assize. 
Therefore  he  is  in  mercv. 

The  Manor  of  Perinton'  comes  by  six. 

1059.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Thomas  Trevet  and 
Ralph  Trevet,  two  of  the  jurors,  did  not  come  on  the  first  day. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Pottexey  comks  by  six. 

1060.  The  men  of  Bore  took  a  certain  Vicar,  Henr\'  de 
Gaunt,  and  imprisoned  him.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

*  Sock  I>cn3rs  in  Ikhevtcr.  or  Tin:inhull. 

«  CUricc's  appeal  is  informal,  pessihly  bccmcse  she  rid  not  allr^e  that  William 
acted  wickedhr  and  itkiciorslTanc  ajiainst  the  r««-  in  olhci  worJs.agiinsi  her  will, 
.As  ihe  record  staxKjf,  she  ir.it.hT  hr.ve  been  a  cor^seniini;  j*rty.  The  vjuiriiiit  pleas  ihat 
an  Appc  lee  mighx  nise  are  >uied  br  bractco,  !o.  14S. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  29 1 


Memb.  21  d. 

The  Manor  of  Cranmere  comes  by  six. 

1061.  They  say  nothing. 

The  Manor  of  Wrington'  comes  by  six. 

1062.  Malefactors  came  to  the  house  of  Edith  Luvelece  and 
burgled  it,  wounded  Edith,  and  killed  Sabina  her  daughter. 
Walter  le  Simer,  John  his  brother,  and  Cecily  his  mother,  are 
suspected  of  that  deed.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  They  dwelt  at  Cumptun'  Martin*.  Therefore  [the 
township]  is  in  mercy.  And  because  the  jurors  present  that 
Walter  was  hanged  and  he  was  not,  all  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Brentemareys  comes  by  six. 

1063.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Thomas  de 
Verdon,  Thomas  de  Bello  Campo,  Philip  son  of  Richard, 
Thomas  de  Marisco,  Robert  de  Marisco,  and  Stephen  le  Bret 
did  not  come  on  the  first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Merttok*  comes  by  twelve. 

1064.  Thomas  le  King  was  found  drowned  in  a  certain 
ditch  in  Merttoke.  Thomas  of  Ireland,  who  was  attached  for 
this,  comes,  and  is  not  suspected.  The  jurors  did  not  present 
the  attachment  ;  therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

1065.  Alice  Joye  appealed  William  son  of  Hugelin  of  rape, 
and  she  does  not  come,  nor  had  she  pledges  beyond  [her]  faith. 
William  comes,  and  the  jury  testify  that  they  are  agreed.  And 
because  William  is  guilty  of  the  deed,  he  is  in  mercy.  Let 
him  be  in  custody.  Afterwards  William  came  and  made  fine 
for  lOOs.  by  pledge  of  Eustace  de  Merttoke,  Walter  le  Messager. 
John  de  Wydecumbe,  and  William  de  Clavill.  Let  Alice  be 
taken. 

1066.  William  King  killed  John  Girard  and  fled  to  the 
church  of  Merttoke.  He  confessed  the  deed  and  abjured  the 
realm.  No  Englishry ;  therefore  murder.  He  was  in  the 
tithing  of  William  Blund  in  Wythicumbe.'  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.     His  chattels,  2J,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

>  Martock.  '  Witcombe,  a  hamlet  of  Martock. 


292  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

1067.  Alice  daughter  of  Thomas  Snelgar  appealed  Robert 
Giffard  of  Esse^  of  rape.  Alice  does  not  come,  nor  had  she 
pledges  beyond  [her]  faith.  Robert  comes.  The  jurors  testify 
that  they  are  agreed,  but  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he 
is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody.  Let  Alice  be  taken. 
Afterwards  Robert  came  and  made  fine  for  2  marks  by  pledge 
of  Pharamus  de  Bolonia  and  Andrew  de  Esse.* 

1068.  The  jurors  present  that  Robert  de  Sancto  Claro  holds 
ten  librates  of  land  in  Stapelton*  by  service  of  serjeanty  and 
by  service  of  bearing  a  towel  (manutergium)  before  our  lady 
the  Queen  on  the  day  of  Pentecost.  Therefore  this  must  be 
discussed. 

1069.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Engelramus  de 
Fingnes,  William  le  Huncle  the  clerk,  Thomas  de  Capes,  and 
Walter  de  Facunbrige  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Burgh  de  Capite  Montis*  comes  by  twelve. 

1070.  Geoffry  Chard'  and  Richard  Boye  were  drowned  from 
a  boat.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price 
of  the  boat  2J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

107 1.  Philip  de  Columbariis  did  not  come  on  the  first  day. 
Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  And  because  the  jurors  concealed 
this,  they  are  all  in  mercy. 

Now  of  the  West  of  the  Paret* 
The  Manor  of  Cryche  comes  by  six, 

1072.  And  they  say  nothing. 

The  Burgh  of  Brugewalter*  comes  by  twelve. 

1073.  William  Scipman  was  drowned  from  a  boat  in  the 
water  of  the  Paret      No  one   is  suspected.     Judgment,  mis- 

^  Ash,  a  hamlet  of  Martock. 

*  This  is  yet  another  instance  of  the  danger  of  compromise  without  leave.  Robert 
is  said  to  be  innocent  of  the  charge,  but  he  has  come  to  some  arrangement  with  Alice, 
and  so  he  has  to  pay  the  considerable  fine. 

'  Stapleton,  a  hamlet  of  Martock.  See  "Testa  de  Ncvill,"  p.  162,  for  this  serjeanty 
somewhat  more  extensive. 

*  See  note  to  No.  229. 

*  The  river  Parret.  •  Bridgwater. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  293 

adventure.     Price  of  the  boat  2j.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer. 

1074.  William  de  Playfeld  was  drowned  from  a  boat  in  the 
water  of  the  Paret,  and  Roger  de  la  Were,  who  was  then  with 
him,  fled  through  fear.  And  because  he  is  not  suspected,  he 
may  return  if  he  will.  It  is  testified  that  the  boat  was  never 
found.  Therefore,  nothing.  And  because  Roger  fled,  and  the 
township  of  Briges  had  him  not  to  right,  it  is  in  mercy.  He 
had  no  chattels. 

1075.  Walter  de  Kentelbergh'  has  sold  cloth  against  the 
assize.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Likewise  the  same  Walter, 
Philip  le  Wayder,  and  Cecily  de  Munemue  have  sold  wine  con- 
trary to  the  assize.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Taunton  comes  by  twelve. 

1076.  Richard  le  Hose  fell  from  a  certain  beam  in  the  church 
of  Taunton,  so  that  he  died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment, 
misadventure.  Price  of  the  beam  6^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer.  It  is  testified  that  the  coroners  do  not  enter  that 
hundred. 

1077.  Richard  Pinel  struck  John  le  Rat  on  the  head  with  a 
hatchet,  so  that  he  died.  Richard  fled  to  the  church  of  Taunton 
and  abjured  the  realm.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Robert 
Bithewod*.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  4.^.,  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1078.  A  certain  stranger  was  found  dead  in  a  ditch  in  Con- 
chelueston'.  John  de  la  Strcte,  the  first  finder,  comes  and  is  not 
suspected.     No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

1079.  Richard  de  Bray  appealed  John  son  of  Edwin  de 
Filetham,  Alfred  son  of  John,  and  William  son  of  Hugh  of  the 
same,  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of  beating. 
Richard  does  not  come,  therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  pro- 
secute arc  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Owen^  {Audoenus)  Aylewin  and 
Simon  Bigge  of  Stapeir.  John,  Alfred,  and  William  come, 
and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are  not  agreed,  but 
they  beat  him.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  Let  them  be 
in  custody.  Afterwards  they  came  and  made  fine  for  2  marks 
by  pledge  of  Hugh  de  Filetham,  Aylmer  de  la  Port,  and  Adam 
de  Schordiche. 

'  or  Oswyn.    See  the  next  case. 


294  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

1080.  Oswyn  Alvvin  and  Simon  Bigge  appealed  William  de 
Spauding,  who  is  dead,  of  robbery  and  breach  of  the  peace  of 
our  lord  the  King.  Oswyn  and  Simon  do  not  come.  Therefore 
they  and  their  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Richard 
Bubbe  of  Stapcll,  Adam  Bubbe  of  the  same,  John  de  Farlegh', 
and  William  Fayrlok  of  StapelT. 

1081.  The  house  of  Haghenild'  de  Nighenhide  was  burgled 
by  unknown  malefactors.  The  vill  of  Nighenhide  Fluri  did  not 
make  pursuit.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1082.  John  Hereward'  appealed  Ranulf  de  Flury  for  the 
burning  of  his  barn  (orrei),  John  does  not  come.  Therefore 
he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit.  John  de 
Everle  and  Peter  de  Tukeswell.  Ranulf  comes.  And  Edelota, 
formerly  the  wife  of  William  the  clerk,  who  was  so  burned  in 
that  barn  that  he  died,  comes  and  appeals  Ranulf  and  William 
his  servant  for  the  death  of  her  husband.  William  and  Ranulf 
come,  and  William  who  is  appealed  as  principal  {de  facto)  comes 
and  defends  everything,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country. 
The  jurors  and  the  four  townships,  except  William  de  la  Ford, 
who  is  one  of  the  jurors,  say  upon  thejr  oath  that  he  is  not 
guilty  as  principal  nor  Ranulf  of  inciting  {de  preceptd).  They 
say  also  that  Edelota  made  that  appeal  by  the  instigation  of 
John  de  Renny.  Therefore  John  is  in  mercy.  Likewise 
Edelota  is  in  mercy  for  her  false  appeal.  Let  her  be  com- 
mitted to  gaol.  Afterwards  John  de  Renny  came  and  made 
fine  for  10  marks  by  pledge  of  Ralph  son  of  Bernard  and 
Richard  de  Mucegros  of  Sandercumbe 

1083.  Edwin  de  Corf  found  Robert  Treiebat  dead  in  the 
way  between  Dudeleston  and  Corf  [As]  first  finder  he  comes, 
and  is  not  suspected.     No  Englishry ;  therefore  murder. 

1084.  Matilda  de  Staunton'  found  William  her  husband 
dead  in  a  certain  marlpit  {marlerd).  She  does  not  come,  and 
she  was  attached  by  John  de  la  Lupe  and  Thomas  de  la  Lupe 
of  Ake.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

1085.  Thomas  de  Hacherdon'  fell  from  a  horse  into  the  water 
of  Filkeford*.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure. 
Price  of  the  horse  2j.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  295 


Memb,  22. 

The  Hundred  of  Taunton' — continued. 

1086.  William  son  of  Adam  de  Bellebir*  found  William  de 
Whytecirche  killed  in  the  fields  of  Olebir*.  Alfred  the  miller  {le 
muner)  of  Bradeford'  is  suspected  of  that  death.  Therefore  let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Walter 
Wlwin.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.     He  had  no  chattels. 

1087.  Richard  Winger  of  Oterford'  killed  Laurence  son  of 
Hugh  de  Oterford'  and  fled  to  the  church  of  Oterford  and  ab- 
jured the  realm.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Eustace  de  Oterford 
in  Oterford.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  And 
because  the  township  of  Oterford  did  not  make  purbuit,  it  is 
in  mercy. 

1088.  Concerning  ladies,  they  say  that  Katharine  de  Monte 
Acuto  was  in  the  gift  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  was  twice  given 
in  marriage  by  our  lord  the  King  {et  bis  mariiata  per  dominum 
Regent),  It  is  not  known  whether  she  be  married  or  not  (si  sit 
mariiata  vel  non).     Her  land  in  this  hundred  is  worth  i^20. 

1089.  Christina,  the  wife  of  Robert  le  Carter,  was  found 
drowned  in  a  certain  ditch  at  Punderesford*.^  Agnes  her 
daughter,  the  first  finder,  does  not  come.  She  was  attached  by 
Robert  her  father.     Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 

1090.  Simon  Bigge  appealed  Robert  de  Bosco  and  John  de 
la  Heginge  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King.  Simon 
does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are 
in  mercy,  to  wit,  Richard  Baldewin  of  Stapell  and  William 
Cridehun  of  the  same.  Robert  and  John  come.  The  jury 
testify  that  they  are  not  agreed,  but  that  Robert  de  Bosco 
wounded  him  [Simon]  with  an  arrow.  Therefore  he  is  in 
mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody.  They  say  that  John  is  not 
guilty ;  therefore  he  is  quit.  Afterwards  Robert  came  and 
made  fine  for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  Stephen  le  Kinge  and  John 
de  Blakedon*.  Afterward  Simon  Bigge  came  and  made  fine 
for  himself  and  his  pledges  for  20$".  by  pledge  of  Henry  de 
Cerne. 

1091.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Nicholas  de 
Meriscte,  Hamelin  Dcudune,  Henry  de  Vernay,  Katharine  de 
Monte  Acuto,  Aubrey  {Albreda)  de  Boteraus,  Jordan  de  Alsewill,* 


'  Foundsford.  '  Over  this  name  is  written  **  languidus. 


»» 


296  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

Richard  de  Estcumbe,  William  Meclefrayn,  Robert  the  clerk 
of  Estcumbe,  Roger  Baupel,  Richard  the  Franklin  of  Saford*, 
Thomas  the  clerk  of  Estcumbe,  Walter  le  Keu,  and  William 
Russel  of  Orchard  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Burgh  of  Tanton  comes  by  twelve. 

1092.  Concerning  cloth  sold,  they  say  that  William  Dwole, 
William  Truir,  Henry  Tinctor,  Richard  Kat,  Adam  Dis,  Roger 
Patrich*,  Robert  Fromund',  and  Robert  Nunige  have  sold  cloth 
against  the  assize.    Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1093.  Concerning  wines  sold  agiinst  the  assize,  they  say  that 
William  Fize,  Ralph  Coce,  Roger  Patrich',  Adam  Dis,  and 
Roger  Pode  have  sold  wine  against  the  assize.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy. 

1094.  William  deTotenes,  a  certain  wandering  rogue  (gutdam 
ribaldus  itinerant),  was  taken  at  Tanton'  and  he  escaped  from 
the  prison  of  the  vill  of  Tanton*,  fled  to  the  church,  and 
abjured  the  realm.  Nothing  is  known  of  his  tithing  or  chattels, 
because  he  was  a  stranger.  Because  he  escaped  from  the  common 
prison  of  the  same  vill,  [the  township]  is  in  mercy. 

1095.  Thomas  de  Milverton*  was  suspected  of  many  larcenies, 
and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was 
not  in  tithing  because  [he  is]  a  clerk,  nor  had  he  chattels. 

The  Manor  of  Neweton'  comes  by  six. 

1096.  William  de  Bikebir*  was  found  drowned  in  the  fishponds 
of  Newton'.  Richard  Cusin,  the  first  finder,  comes  and  is  not 
suspected.  No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder.  The  jurors  falsely 
presented  Englishry  ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1097.  Peter  de  Aysse  appealed  Walter  de  Exeton*  for  that 
he  broke  into  his  house  and  beat  him,  disgracefully  treated  him, 
and  took  from  him  13^.,  and  that  he  did  this  wickedly  and 
feloniously  he  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  Walter  comes  and 
defends  everything,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country.  The 
jurors  and  the  four  townships  testify  that  Walter  is  not  guilty  of 
burglary,  but  they  say  that  he  beat  him  as  he  [Peter]  appealed 
him.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Peter  is  in  mercy  for  his  false 
appeal.     Afterwards   both   came  and    made   fine   for    i    mark 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  297 

Walter's  pledges  for  J  mark,  Robert  Hamelin  and  Baldwin 
de  Ho.  Peter's  pledges  for  the  other  J  mark,  John  de  la 
Wurth  of  Wynesford'  and  William  de  Bradelegh  of  the  same. 

1098.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Richard  de  Wrotham, 
Thomas  de  Perham,  and  Andrew  de  Chanceaus  did  not  come  on 
the  first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Welinton'  comes  by  twelve. 

1099.  Thomas  de  Stanton'  was  found  killed  below  Holecumbc, 
and  Martin  Girard  and  Adam  the  miller  (le  muner)  were  out- 
lawed for  that  death  upon  the  suit  of  Peter  his  father.  Martin 
was  in  the  tithing  of  John  Young  in  Bokland.  Therefore  it  is 
in  mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  Adam  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Richard  de  Chilvest'  in  Hamme.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He 
had  no  chattels. 

1 100.  Geoffry  son  of  Andrew  wounded  Henry  son  of 
William,  so  that  he  died.  [Geoffry]  fled.  Let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Clatewurthy.*  There- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.     He  had  no  chattels. 

I  lOi.  Nicholas  de  Schet  wounded  William  his  brother  so  that 
he  died.  [Nicholas]  fled.  Let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Little  Baggebergh'.  Therefore  it 
is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  2ij.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must 
answer.  The  jurors  presented  that  his  chattels  were  not  worth 
more  than  i  mark.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1102.  John  Serun  and  William  de  la  Boye  killed  Richard 
Kache  and  were  outlawed  upon  the  suit  of  William  Kach'  his 
father.  They  fled.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed.* They  dwelt  at  Great  Bagewurth.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 
Williams  chattels,  3^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  mubt  answer. 
John's  chattels,  5^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  The 
chattels  were  delivered  to  Robert  Bardolf  of  West  Baggebergh' 
and  Gilbert  Wysdom  of  the  same,  so  that  they  should  have 
them  before  the  justices,  and  they  had  not  Therefore  they  are 
in  mercy. 

1 103.  William  Prudd,  whom  William  le  Provur  appealed  for 

*  Sec  No.  1 163. 

>  I  cannot  explain  this.  If  they  had  already  been  outlawed  on  the  suit  of  the  dead 
man's  father,  why  this  direction  ?  Perhaps  the  first  statement  was  shown  to  be  in- 
accurate ;  perhaps  there  had  been  defect  in  the  process,  or  perhaps  the  clerk  made  a 
misUke.     See /«^.r/,  No.  1 109. 

2  Q 


29»^  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

consorting  and  larceny,  comes.    He  is  not  suspected.     Therefore 
he  is  quit. 

1 104.  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  the  cobbler  (Su/orts\ 
appealed  Richard  de  Lydeyard  of  mayhem  of  her  shoulder. 
Richard  comes  and  defends  ever>'thing,  and  puts  himself  upon 
the  country.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore 
he  is  quit. 

1105.  William  K ache,  arrested  for  clipping  coins,  came  and 
confessed  himself  guilty.  Therefore,  etc.^  His  chattels,  2j.,  for 
which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Also  1 5^.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer.* 

1 106.  Concerning  wines,  they  say  that  Herbert  de  Solurio 
has  sold  wine  against  the  assize.     Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 

1 107.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Ralph  Trevet  and 
Jordan  de  Herpeford  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

Memb.  22(L 

The  Hundred  of  Norperton*  comes  by  twelve. 

1 108.  Walter  Bragge,  Robert  Hode,  William  the  little  miller 
{le petit  fnuner\  and  Margery  his  wife  beat  Jordan  Heywulf*  so 
that  he  died.  William  and  Margery  fled  to  the  church  of 
Perton'  and  abjured  the  realm.  William  was  in  the  tithing  of 
the  Hospital  of  Perton*.  Therefore  it  is  in  merc>'.  His  chattels, 
3^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Walter  and  Robert  have 
fled.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  They  were 
in  the  same  tithing.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  They  had  no 
chattels. 

1 109.  Robert  Boye  was  outlawed  for  the  death  of  Richard  la 
Bule  upon  the  suit  of  Matilda,  Richard's  wife.  Afterwards  it  is 
testified  that  he  was  not  outlawed.  Therefore  let  him  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.  He  dwelt  at  Capite  Montis.  There- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.     It  is  not  known  what  chattels,  etc 

mo.  Waller  Makerel  was  run  over  by  a  cart,  so  that  he 
died.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of 
the  cart  and  oxen  25J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer 

1 1 1 1.  Joan  wife  of  John  de  Stretheholt  found  Isabella  her 
daughter  drowned,  and  she  does  net  come.      Therefore  she  and 

^  This  mean«  that  he  was  to  be  hjmged,  a^  i(e  sce  £rom  the  margin. 

^  Ihe  i^.  wsu>  no  doubt  a  Uter  ad£tioii.  '  Norm  Petherton. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  299 


her  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Hugh  de  la  Hele  of  Strethe- 
holt  and  Robert  Hamiletim'  of  the  same.  No  one  is  suspected 
Judgment,  misadventure.  And  John  le  Waleys  presented  that 
she  was  pregnant  (in  puperid)  when  she  was  not  Therefore  he 
is  in  mercy.  Afterwards  John  le  Waleys  came  and  made  fine 
for  \  marie  by  pledge  of  John  Cote  of  Streteholte. 

1 1 12.  Nicholas  le  Tresor  was  outlawed  for  the  burning  of 
the  house  of  Roger  Baril,  upon  the  suit  of  Philip  Baril.  He  was 
in  the  mainpast  of  Roger  himself  Therefore  he  [Roger]  is  in 
mercy.     He  [Nicholas]  had  no  chattels. 

1 1 13.  Walter  de  Estover  fled  after  harbouring  thieves,  one  of 
whom  was  hanged  at  Briges.*  He  is  suspected.  Therefore  let 
him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Walter 
le  Bloy  of  Hamme.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels, 
29^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1 1 14.  Walter  de  Huntewurth'  found  an  unknown  man  dead 
between  Strete  and  Briges,  No  one  is  suspected.  No  Englishry ; 
therefore  murder. 

1 1 1 5.  Matilda  wife  of  William  de  Chedcseye  appealed  Simon 
de  Bagetripe  of  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and 
she  does  not  come.  She  had  no  pledge  except  [her]  faith. 
Simon  comes,  and  the  jury  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are 
agreed,  and  that  Simon  is  guilty.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 
Let  them  lie  in  custody,  and  let  Matilda  be  taken.  The 
jurors  present  upon  their  roll  that  one  Mabel  appealed  him. 
Therefore  all  [the  jurors]  are  in  mercy.*  Afterwards  Simon  came 
and  made  fine  for  20s.  by  pledge  of  Robert  de  Bagetrippe. 

1 1 16.  Adam  de  la  Purye  of  Milecumbe  found  Roger  de 
Milecumbe  drowned  in  the  water  of  Thon.  Adam,  the  first 
finder,  does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in 
mercy,  to  wit,  Walter  Gefray  of  Huntewurth  and  Walter  the 
hay  ward  of  Hamme. 

1 1 17.  John  Midclsowy  was  drowned  in  the  water  of  Pcret,* 
and  Iseult  his  wife,  William  the  cobbler,  Reginald  de  Souy,  and 
Peter  son  of  Nicholas  were  then  with  him  in  the  boat.  All  come 
except  Peter.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  arc  in  mercy,  to 
wit,  Reginald  de  Schapewyk  and  John  the  carpenter  of  Yvelcestr*. 
Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  boat  3^.,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  answer. 

*  Bridgiratcr.  '  Thai  if,  for  the  mistake  in  the  name. 

•  The  liver  Parrel. 


300  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS 

1118.  Matilda  daughter  of  Jocelin  appealed  Adam  Cule  of 
rape,  and  both  come.  The  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties] 
are  agreed.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  They  made  fine  for 
^  mark  by  pledge  of  John  son  of  Sussanus  de  Chedelesy  and 
John  son  of  Walter  of  the  same. 

1 1 19.  Adam  Baret  of  Cusington*  was  seen  in  the  garden  of 
Robert  de  Bagetrippe.  On  account  of  this  he  fled  to  the  church 
of  Baggetripe,  and  afterwards  escaped.  He  found  pledges  that 
he  would  stand  to  right,  to  wit,  Nicholas  son  of  Aunger  de 
Baggetrippe  and  Alan  de  Baggetrippe.  Now  he  does  not 
come ;  therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy. 

1 1 20.  Liota  daughter  of  John  de  Pegenes  appealed  John  de 
Cheselode  that,  by  night  on  Friday  next  after  the  feast  of  St 
Nicholas,  in  the  24th  year,  he  broke  into  the  house  of  her  father 
and  by  force  had  connexion  with  her,  but  she  was  not  a  virgin. 
John  came  and  defended  everything,  etc.,  and  put  himself  upon 
the  country.  The  jurors  testify  that  before  that  time  he  had  a  boy 
by  her,  and  that  often,  after  and  before,  he  had  connexion  with 
her,  and  not  by  force.  Therefore  she  is  in  mercy  for  her  false 
appeal,  but  she  is  pardoned  because  she  is  a  pauper. 

1 1 2 1.  Mabel  Spark  of  Dunewer  appealed  John  son  of  Geoffry 
of  Pensowy  of  rape,  and  she  does  not  come.  Therefore  she  and 
her  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  namely,  Robert  Spark  and 
Nicholas  Spark.  John  comes,  and  they  are  agreed.  Therefore 
he  is  in  mercy ;  let  him  be  in  custody.  Afterwards  John  came 
and  made  fine  for  20s,  by  pledge  of  Robert  Spark  and  Geofiiy 
Edriche. 

1 1 22.  William  son  of  Roger  de  Chedeseye  was  drowned 
from  a  certain  boat  in  the  water  at  La  Pulle.  The  first  finder, 
to  wit,  Roger  his  father,  comes,  and  is  not  suspected.  Judgment, 
misadventure.  Price  of  the  boat  12^.,  for  which  the  sheriff"  must 
answer. 

1 1 23.  Roger  de  Porres  fell  dead  in  the  road  of  Wemedon. 
Aubrey  (^/ir^'^-fl:)  his  daughter,  the  first  finder,  comes,  and  is  not 
suspected.     No  Englishry ;  therefore  murder. 

1 1 24.  William  Fareman  killed  Thomas  son  of  Goldive,  and 
fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in 
the  tithing  of  Bure.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  45., 
for  which  the  sheriff"  must  answer.  The  land  of  the  Hospital  in 
Brige  did  not  make  pursuit ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1 125.  Roger  son  of  Hugh,  accused  of  larceny,  comes  and 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  3OI 

defends  everything,  and  puts  himself  upon  the  country  for  good 
and  ill.  The  jurors  and  the  four  nearest  townships  testify  that 
he  is  not  guilty.    Therefore  he  is  quit. 

1 1 26.  Godfrey  de  Mora  and  Henry  de  Femagu,  accused  of 
larceny,  fled,  and  are  suspected.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  Godfrey  was  in  the  tithing  of  Walter  the  tithing- 
man  of  Nortperton.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Henry  de  Fer- 
nagu  was  in  the  tithing  of  Adam  the  tithingman  of  Baggetrippe. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Godfrey's  chattels,  71J.  7^.,  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  answer.  Henry  Fernagu's  chattels,  155.  2d,,  for 
which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1 1 27.  Eustace  de  Duueliz  holds  40^.  of  land  in  Pegenesse*  by 
serjeanty,  that  he  should  be  usher  («/  sti  hostiarius)  in  the  hall 
of  our  lord  the  King,  and  [also]  a  rent  of  \  mark  in  Crandon' 
which  is  an  escheat  to  our  lord  the  King  of  the  lands  of  the 
Normans.     Ralph  Huse  holds  that  [land]. 

1 1 28.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Geoffry  de  Wlmer- 
ston',  Reginald  Elmark,  Nicholas  Anger,  Roger  Maunsel,  Robert 
de  Filloc,  and  Richard  de  Wrotham  were  not  [here]  on  the  first 
day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

Memb.  23. 

The  Manor  of  Lenge  comes  by  six, 

1 1 29.  And  they  say  nothing  but  what  should  be  said  before. 

The  Hundred  of  Karemtun'*  comes  by  twelve. 

1 1 30.  Philip  le  Hore  was  done  to  death  {pbrutus  fuit  ad 
mortem)  by  a  certain  branch.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judg- 
ment, misadventure.  Price  of  the  branch  i^.,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  answer. 

1 131.  Robert  de  Harewudd'  appealed  Geoffry  de  Harewudd* 
of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  of  wounds.  Now  he 
[Robert]  comes  and  will  not  sue  against  him.  Therefore  he  and 
his  pledge  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  William  le  Tort.  He  made  fine 
for  himself,  and  not  for  his  pledge,  for  \  mark  by  pledge  of 
Richard  de  Cludesham  and  Ivo  de  Lokebergh.     Geoffry  comes, 

'  Horsey  Pignes  in  Bridgewater.     The  tenant  at  the  time  of  the  Domesday  Survey 
wa«  John  the  usher  {Hostiarius).     See  also  No.  1228. 

'  Crandon  in  Bawdrip.  '  Carhmmpton, 


302  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  [the  parties]  are  agreed,  and  that 
he  is  guilty.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody. 
Afterwards  Geoffry  came  and  made  fine  for  2ar.  by  pledge  of 
Thomas  de  Legh  and  Walter  de  Crawedon*. 

1 1 32.  Robert  Cory  was  found  dead  in  the  tithing  of  Wythe- 
cumbe.     No  one  is  suspected.     No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

1 1 33.  Ralph  de  Riscumbe  was  suspected  of  harbouring 
thieves,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Almundeswurth'.*  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  His  chattels,  Ss.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 
Robert  Cray,  William  Joclenne,  and  Henry  the  Irishman  (/e 
Ireys\  who  were  harboured  by  Ralph,  are  suspected  of  larceny. 
Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  Henry  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Exeford  of  the  monks  of  Nethe  ;  therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  Robert  and  William  were  in  the  tithing  of  Almundes- 
wurth  ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Their  chattels  were  elsewhere 
before  the  justices. 

1 134.  The  jurors  present  that  Richard  de  Wrotham  takes  the 
herbage  of  their  common  of  pasture ;  and  because  that  plea 
concerns  the  justice  of  the  forest,  the  jurors  are  in  mercy  for 
their  foolish  presentment  {stulta  presentacione). 

1135.  Adam  de  la  Thurne,  arrested  on  suspicion  of  larceny, 
comes  and  defends  everjthing,  and  puts  himself  upon  the 
country  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  and  the  four  neighbouring 
townships  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.     Therefore  he  is  quit. 

1 1 36.  Sybil  de  Rammescumbe  appealed  Benedict  de  Wer- 
well  for  that  he  had  connexion  with  her  by  force.  He  was 
outlawed  upon  the  suit  of  Sybil.  The  same  appealed  Richard 
Cadyho  of  inciting.  Richard  came  and  defended  everything, 
and  put  himself  upon  the  country.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  is 
not  guilty ;  therefore  he  is  quit  Let  Sybil  be  committed  to 
gaol  for  her  false  appeal.  Benedict,  who  was  outlawed,  was  of 
the  mainpast  of  Rogcs  son  of  Simon ;  therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 
[Benedict]  had  no  chattels.  Aften^'ards  Sybil  came  and  made 
fine  for  \  mark  by  pledge  of  Ralph  Stridebolt  of  Saunford*. 

1 1 37.  Touching  defaults,  they  say  that  Reginald  de  Moun, 
Philip  Basset,  William  Capcrun,  Simon  de  Stanham,  Ralph  le 
Tort.  Hugh  Peverel,  Geoffry  the  Small  {Parvus),  Walter  Dare, 
and  Richard  Everard  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

*  Almsworthy,  in  Exford. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  303 

1 1 38.  One  William  Heme  escaped  from  the  custody  of 
Ralph  Egoir  and  William  le  Fulur.  Ralph  EgolP  was  of  the 
vill  of  Almundeswurth',  and  William  was  of  Wynmersham.* 
Those  two  townships  have  made  their  peace  with  the  sheriff  for 
the  evasion,  and  the  sheriff  must  answer  for  100s.  which  he  took 
for  that 

1 1 39.  William  Young  (le  Jeueti)  of  Ramescumbe  is  in  mercy 
for  his  transgression.  Afterwards  William  came  and  made  fine 
for  20s.  by  pledge  of  Robert  Monelithe  of  Wthton  and  Robert 
de  Aqua  of  the  same. 

1 140.  William  de  Exeford*,  accused  of  having  found  treasure, 
docs  not  come.  He  was  attached  by  Walter  Upehille  of  Al- 
mundeswurth  and  Gerx-ase  le  Hert  of  the  same.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy.  The  jurors  concealed  that  matter.  There- 
fore they  are  in  mercy. 

1 141.  Henry  de  Ceme,  arrested  for  the  death  of  Alexander 
de  Luveny,  came  and  defended  everything,  and  put  himself  upon 
the  country  for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not 
guilty.     Therefore  he  is  quit 

The  Burgh  of  Dunestore  comes  by  twelve. 

1 142.  Richard  le  Rus  was  done  to  death  {pbrutus  futt  ad 
mortem)  in  the  castle  of  Dunstore.  No  Englishry  ;  therefore 
murder.  The  jurors  falsely  presented  the  finder.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy.' 

The  Manor  of  Brigeford  comes  by  six. 

1 143.  Ralph  Welifed  of  Baunton,  Richard  Yalperug',  and 
William  Wake  killed  Hugh  de  la  Crofter  of  Brigeford,  and  fled, 
and  were  outlawed  upon  the  suit  of  Richard  and  James,  brothers 
of  Hugh.  They  dwelt  at  Baunton  in  the  county  of  Devon. 
Therefore  it  [the  township]  is  in  mercy.  It  is  not  known  [what] 
chattels  [they  had]. 

The  Hundred  of  Wyleton*'  comes  by  twelve. 

1 144.  Robert  Lilie  and  W^alter  Guket  killed  Walter  Seleiner. 
Robert  fled  to  the  church  of  St  Decuman*   and  abjured  the 

*  Wilmcrsham,  near  Porlock. 

^  This  was  no  doubt  regarded  as  a  case  of  accidental  death,  but,  quite  ezceptionallj, 
the  record  is  silent  as  to  the  cause. 

*  Willilon.  *  near  Walchet. 


304  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

realm.  Walter  Guket  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and 
outlawed.  Robert  dwelt  at  Karampton'.  Therefore  [the  town- 
ship] is  in  mercy.  Walter  Guket  was  received  at  Taunton*. 
Therefore  [that  township]  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors  did  not 
present  any  attachment.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  And 
because  the  township  of  St.  Decuman  did  not  make  pursuit 
it  is  in  mercy.  Likewise  the  four  neighbouring  townships,  to 
wit,  Wechet,  Wyleton,  Kantokeheved  the  little,  and  Clive,*  are  in 
mercy  because  they  did  not  make  pursuit.  Afterwards  it  is 
testified  that  Robert  Lilie  did  not  abjure  the  realm  in  the 
presence  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  now  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed. 

1 145.  Elena,  who  was  the  wife  of  William  de  Smalecumbe, 
appealed  John  le  Waleys,  Walter  le  Seer,  and  many  others,  of 
the  death  of  William  her  husband.  The  jurors  testify  that  Walter 
Seer  killed  him.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
He  was  of  the  mainpast  of  the  Prior  of  Stokecurcy.  Therefore 
he  [the  Prior]  is  in  mercy.  It  is  not  known  [what]  chattels 
[Walter  had].  And  because  Walter  Seer  killed  William  in  the 
presence  of  William  la  Warre  of  Stokes,  William  the  reeve  of 
Munketon*,  Richard  the  smith  of  Stokes,  Robert  le  Tinker  of 
Stokes,  John  la  Bule  of  the  same,  Baldwin  de  Munketon',  Ralph 
Gorge,  and  William  Knaploc,  and  they  did  not  take  him,  all  are 
in  mercy.  They  all  made  fine  for  lOOs.  by  pledge  of  Ralph 
son  of  Bernard,  Walter  Russel,  Thomas  Trevet,  and  William 
Fichet.  Let  Elena  be  committed  to  gaol.'  Afterwards  Elena 
came  and  made  fine  for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  William  de  Sancto 
Stephano. 

1 146.  Robert  le  Gras  of  Parleston' was  found  dead  in  the 
field  at  Alfaxton'.  It  is  not  known  who  killed  him.  No  Eng- 
lishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

1 147.  Luke  de  Foxford  appealed  Thomas  Avenaunt  of  the 
peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and  robbery.  He  [also]  appealed 
Robert  Avalon,  Robert  de  Gardino,  and  Jordan  Ic  Karver  as 
accessories,  and  he  appealed  Robert  de  Wygorn*  of  consenting. 
All  [the  appellees]  come,  and  the  jurors  testify  that  they  are  not 
agreed,  nor  are  they  guilty.      Therefore  they  are  quit.     Luke 

*  Watchct,  Williton,  Quantokshead,  and  Clecvc.  It  seems  exceptional  to 
amerce  the  neighbouring  townships  as  well  as  that  immediately  in  default.  The 
crown  takes  no  less  than  eight  amercements  out  of  this  case,  besides  the  chattels  of 
the  outlaws. 

^  For  the  failure  of  her  appeal  in  respect  of  others  than  Walter. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  305 


does  not  come.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are 
in  mercy,  to  wit,  Nicholas  le  Fulur  of  Foxford  and  Richard  the 
Cook  icocus)  of  the  same. 

1 148.  Alice  Velata  of  Skilegate^  was  killed  by  the  clapper 
of  a  certain  bell  (/^r  baterellum  cujusdam  campane).  Because 
the  township  of  Skilegate  did  not  present  that  matter  to  the 
county  [court],  nor  had  the  clapper  before  the  justices,  it  is  in 
mercy. 

1 149.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Philip  de  Cantu 
Lupo,  Richard  de  Wayvill*,  Reginald  de  Albemare,  W  .  .  . 
de  Ludeton,  Reginald  de  Moyun,  Philip  de  Columbariis,  Robert 
de  Camera,  Richard  de  Cusoyw  .  .  ,  and  William  Mau- 
baunc  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy." 

Metnb,  i^d. 

The  Burgh  of  Wechet«  comes  by  twelve. 

1150.  Ayihrty  {Albreda)  de  Wechet  appealed  William  Cute 
Robert  Russepin,  John  la  Wayte,  William  the  baker,  and 
Andrew  of  the  churchyard  {de  cimiterio)  of  the  peace  of  our 
lord  the  King  and  of  robbery.  Aubrey  does  not  come,  because 
she  is  dead.  None  of  the  appealed  comes.  William  Cute  was 
attached  by  John  the  Palmer  of  Karampton  and  Ralph  Uppe- 
huir  of  the  same.  Robert  Russepin'  was  attached  by  William 
Gersum*  and  William  Woding*  of  Dunestore.  John  was  at- 
tached by  William  Fisel  and  Roger  Wyschard*  of  Dunestore. 
William  the  baker*  was  attached  by  Herbert  the  merchant 
{mercatorem)  of  Dunestore,  and  Edmund*  of  the  same.  Andrew 
was  attached  by  William  le  Waleys  of  Dunestore  and  Adam  de 
Cruce  of  the  same.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Clive*  comes  by  six. 

1 151.  Hugh  le  Simple  appealed  Adam  de  Wecheford,'  David 
the  cornishman,  Adam   le   Hert,  Richard  his   brother,  Robert, 

*  Skilgate. 

*  At  the  foot  of  this  membrane  is  "  usque  kuc**  (see  note  to  No.  738),  and  at  the 
top  of  the  next  "  hie  tmifiendo  '*  in  the  same  hand. 

*  Watcher. 

*  These  persons  are  sai'l  to  be  dead.     "  Ob  "  is  written  over  the  names. 
"  The  word  '*  nick  "  (nihil)  is  written  orer  this  name. 

«  Cleeve.  »  Washford. 

2    R 


305  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Wyppe,  Hugh  Long  (longum),  Ralph  le  Velegh',  William  the 
weaver  (Tixtorem\  Stiholfus  the  weaver  (le  Teler),  Ralph  the 
baker  {ptstorem)^  Hugh  the  miller  of  Clive,  Nicholas  the  hay- 
ward,  William  the  servant  of  the  cellarer  {servientem  cellerarii) 
of  Clive,  Hugh  the  Serjeant  {le  seriaunt),  Roger  Cule,  Ralph 
the  clerk,  Geoffry  the  messer  {le  messer^)  of  Legh,  Hugh  the 
esquire  {armigerum)^  Ralph  fitz  Urse,  Elias  le  Careter,  Thomas 
Flyghe,  Walter  the  Franklin,  Roger  of  the  fulling  mill,  and 
Hugh  of  the  mill  of  Rode,  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the 
King  and  of  robbery.  The  same  Hugh  appealed  Simon  the 
Abbot  of  Clive,  Humphrey  prior  of  the  same,  and  Robert 
de  Lidbar  .  .  ,  cellarer  of  the  same,  of  inciting.  All  the 
appealed  [come]  except  Richard  le  Hert,  Hugh  Long,  Hugh 
the  Serjeant,  Hugh  the  esquire,  Ralph  fitz  Urse,  Helias  the 
carter  {careccarium\  Roger  of  the  fulling  mill  {de  molendino 
fiUerario),  and  Hugh  the  miller  of  la  Rode.  Richard  le  Hert 
was  attached  by  Gilbert  de  la  Ford  and  Henry  de  la  Ford. 
Hugh  Long  was  attached  by  Ralph  le  Port  and  Adam  de  la 
Hele.     Hugh  the  serjeant  was  attached  by  Gilbert  Talebot  and 

Richard  de  la  Tome,  and  Hugh  the  esquire *     Afterwards 

the  Abbot  came  and  made  fine  for  himself  and  all  his  above 
written  for  \QOs,  by  pledge  of  John  de  Reyny  and  Ralph  fitz 
Urse. 

1 1 52.  Harewuda,  the  prioress  of  Cuwyke,  does  not  come. 
Therefore  she  is  in  mercy.'  And  because  she  withdrew  suit 
from  the  manor  [court]  of  Clive,  it  is  said  that  the  Abbot  may 
distrain  them*  to  do  suit  if  he  wishes. 

1 1 53.  William  Jurday  fled  to  the  church  of  Clive,  confessed 
himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the  realm.  The  jurors  concealed 
that  matter ;  therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  William  was  received  at 
Crandon'.  Therefore  [the  township]  is  in  mercy  because  it  had 
him  not  to  right.     He  had  no  chattels. 

The  Manor  of  Wvleton'  comes  by  six. 

1 1 54.  Sabina  daughter  of  William  Nortman  found  Elena 
daughter  of  Roger  the  smith  drowned  in  the  water  at  Duniford'. 

*  Sre  Ducange,  Gloss.,  sub,  tit.  **  messariuSf**  and  note  to  No.  771. 

•  There  is  an  omisuon  here. 

»  The  note  "  mia  "  in  the  margin  is  struck  out. 

^  That  is,  the  persons  liable  to  do  suit  at  the  manor  court. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  307 


The  township  of  Duniford'  did  not  present  that  matter  to  the 
county  [court].     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Nettelcumbe  comes  by  six. 

11 5 5.  Roger  Dean, of  Dunestore, fell  from  a  horse,  so  that  he 
died.  The  jurors  falsely  presented  the  finder.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy.  Price  of  the  horse  J  mark,  for  which  the  same 
sheriff  must  answer.^ 

The  Burgh  of  Stawaye*  comes  by  twelve. 

1 1 56.  The  jurors  are  in  mercy  because  they  have  not  pre- 
sented anything  on  the  articles  [of  the  eyre]  and  [because] 
Philip  de  Columbariis,  who  is  their  lord,  did  not  come  on  the 
first  day,  and  this  they  concealed. 

The  Manor  of  Crawecumbe^  comes  by  six. 

1 157.  Hugh  dc  Hethfeud  found  Henry  Pirinam  drowned  in 
the  water  of  Troubrig'.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not  sus- 
pected.    No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

11 58.  John  Hipekoc  fled  to  the  church  of  Crawecumbe, 
confessed  larceny,  and  abjured  the  realm.  The  jurors  concealed 
that  matter.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  His  chattels  were 
appraised  before  Robert  de  Lexington. 

1159.  Hugh  Beghe  of  Crawecumbe  was  suspected  of  larceny, 
and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was 
received  at  Crawecumbe.  Therefore  [the  township]  is  in  mercy 
because  it  had  him  not  to  right. 

1 1 60.  Wy burga  de  Crawcumbe,  accused  of  harbouring  thieves, 
came  and  defended  everything,  and  put  herself  uppn  the  country 
for  good  and  ill.  The  jurors  testify  that  she  is  not  guilty. 
Therefore  she  is  quit. 

1 161.  Adam  Brekeleg  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled. 
Therefori^  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  of  the 
mainpast  of  Alexander  the  chaplain  of  Stanlegh'.  Therefore 
he  [Alexander]  is  in  mercy.     He  [Adam]  had  no  chattels, 

^  See  No.  1 1 67,  infra.  *  Stowcy.  '  Crowcr*ml)C. 


305  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Wyppe,  Hugh  Long  (longuin),  Ralph  le  Velegh',  WiUiam  the 
weaver  (Tixtoreni)^  Stiholfus  the  weaver  (le  Teler)^  Ralph  the 
baker  {pistorem)^  Hugh  the  miller  of  Clive,  Nicholas  the  hay- 
ward,  William  the  servant  of  the  cellarer  {sennentem  cellerarii) 
of  Clive,  Hugh  the  serjeant  {le  seriaunt),  Roger  Cule,  Ralph 
the  clerk,  Geoffry  the  messer  {le  messer^)  of  Legh,  Hugh  the 
esquire  {amiigeruin),  Ralph  fitz  Urse,  Elias  le  Careter,  Thomas 
Flyghe,  Walter  the  Franklin,  Roger  of  the  fulling  mill,  and 
Hugh  of  the  mill  of  Rode,  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the 
King  and  of  robbery.  The  same  Hugh  appealed  Simon  the 
Abbot  of  Clive,  Humphrey  prior  of  the  same,  and  Robert 
de  Lidbar  .  .  ,  cellarer  of  the  same,  of  inciting.  All  the 
appealed  [come]  except  Richard  le  Hert,  Hugh  Lon^r,  Hugh 
the  Serjeant,  Hugh  the  esquire,  Ralph  fitz  Urse,  Hclias  the 
carter  {careccarium\  Roger  of  the  fulling  mill  \de  molenditio 
fiilerario),  and  Hugh  the  miller  of  la  Rode.  Richard  le  Hert 
was  attached  by  Gilbert  de  la  Ford  and  Henry  de  la  Ford. 
Hugh  Long  was  attached  by  Ralph  le  Port  and  Adam  de  la 
Hele.     Hugh  the  serjeant  was  attached  by  Gilbert  Talebot  and 

Richard  de  la  Torne,  and  Hugh  the  esquire ^     Afterwards 

the  Abbot  came  and  made  fine  for  himself  and  all  his  above 
written  for  \QOs,  by  pledge  of  John  de  Reyny  and  Ralph  fitz 
Urse. 

1 1 52.  Harewuda,  the  prioress  of  Cuwyke,  does  not  come. 
Therefore  she  is  in  mercy.'  And  because  she  withdrew  suit 
from  the  manor  [court]  of  Clive,  it  is  said  that  the  Abbot  may 
distrain  them*  to  do  suit  if  he  wishes. 

1 1 53.  William  Jurday  fled  to  the  church  of  Clive,  confessed 
himself  a  thief,  and  abjured  the  realm.  The  jurors  concealed 
that  matter;  therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  William  was  received  at 
Crandon'.  Therefore  [the  township]  is  in  mercy  because  it  had 
him  not  to  right.     He  had  no  chattels. 

The  Manor  of  Wyleton'  comes  by  six. 

1 1 54.  Sabina  daughter  of  William  Nortman  found  Elena 
daughter  of  Roger  the  smith  drowned  in  the  water  at  Duniford'. 

*  Src  Ducangc,  Gloss.,  sub,  tit,  **  mes sarins  "  and  note  to  No.  771. 

•  There  is  an  omis>ion  here. 

•  The  note  **  mia  "  in  the  margin  is  struck  out. 

*  That  is,  the  persons  liable  to  do  suit  at  the  manor  court. 


2C  !I 


3  -n-    .- 


:2r2iac:i   — " 


.-'-'_ 


Si-^. 


3  to  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

chaplain  comes  and  is  a  clerk.  He  is  delivered  to  the  official 
of  the  Bishop  that  he  may  do  to  him  in  court  christian  what 
right  may  dictate.  The  jurors  testify  that  none  of  those  who  arc 
appealed  is  guilty.  Therefore  all  are  quit.  Adam  is  in  mercy 
for  his  false  appeal.  Let  him  be  committed  to  gaol.  He  is  a 
pauper.    Therefore  let  him  be  pardoned. 

1 176.  ^Richard  the  carter  and  William  Stuure,  arrested 
{arestati)  by  the  twelve  jurors  of  Abbediche  for  robbery  from  the 
aforesaid  Adam  Bali  of  his  fish  and  for  wounds  done  to  him,  came 
and  defended  everything,  and  put  themselves  upon  the  country. 
The  jurors  testify  that  Richard  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he  is 
quit.  They  testify  that  William  is  guilty.  Therefore,  etc.  He 
had  no  chattels. 

1 177.  John  le  Webbe,  arrested  {arestatus)  for  the  same  deed, 
came  and  defended  everything,  and  put  himself  upon  the  country. 
The  jurors  say  thai  the  thing  stolen  was  taken  to  the  inn  {Jiospi- 
ciu7n)  of  Roger,  and  he  knew  who  brought  it  and  was  a  consent- 
ing party.  Therefore,  etc."  His  chattels,  7^.,  for  which  the 
.same  sheriff  must  answer. 

The  Hundred  of  Abbedik'*  comes  by  twelve. 

1 178.  Walter  Glome  was  found  killed  in  the  forest  of  Nether- 
ham,  and  John  and  Roger  sons  of  Fromund  de  Duneyet  and 
William  Salter  of  Assul  were  suspected  of  that  death,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  John,  Roger  and 
William  were  in  the  tithing  of  Dunyete.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  John  and  Roger  had  no  chattels.  William's  chattels, 
4^.  5^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Walter  was  buried 
without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  the  township  of 
Dunyete  is  in  mercy.  William  le  Salter  was  received  in  the 
vill  of  Asshul  after  the  deed.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1 179.  An  unknown  person  was  found  drowned  in  the  water 


<« 


^  This  entry  is  preceded  by  one  i/vhich  is  incomplete,  is  erased  and  stated  to  be 
erroTy^  relating  to  the  same  case.  It  says  that  the  detendants  are  **  accused,"  net 
**  arrested  by  the  jurors,"  and  they  put  themselves  upon  the  country  and  the  four  town- 
ships. I  have  seen  no  other  case  m  which  twelve  jurors  made  an  arrest.  There  seems 
to  be  little  doubt  that  the  men  were  arrested  in  consequence  of  the  direction  given  to 
the  jurors  by  the  justices  after  delivery  to  the  former  of  the  articles  of  the  eyre  :  **  quod 
si  sit  aliquis  in  hundredo  vel  waf>entakio  suOy  qui  malt  creditus  sit  de  maleficio  aliquo^ 
alum  statim  capiant  si  possint^'x  Bract.,  fo.  1 1 6.  William  was  adjudged  to  be 
handed,  as  appears  by  the  marginal  note. 

^  Tie,  too,  was  hanged.  Abdick. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  311 


of  Doueliz.     No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder.     The  jurors  did 
not  present  the  finder.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1180.  Christina  daughter  of  Gervase  appealed  Henry  de 
Appse  that  he  by  force  deflowered  her.  Henry  came  and 
defended  everything,  and  put  himself  upon  the  country.  The 
jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he  is  quit,  and 
Christina  is  in  mercy  for  her  false  appeal.  Let  her  be  committed 
to  gaol. 

1 181.  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  Gule,  appealed 
Ralph  le  Waleys  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  of  robbery, 
and  of  beating.  Ralph  came  and  defended  everything.  And 
because  the  appeal  is  null,  let  inquest  be  made  of  the  country. 
The  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he  is  quit,  and 
Alice  is  in  mercy. 

1182.  Alexander  dc  Asshuir^  appealed  Ralph  Cone  and 
Robert  the  shepherd  {le  Berker)  of  the  death  of  Richard  his 
son.  They  were  outlawed  for  that  death  upon  the  suit  of 
Alexander  his  [Richard's]  father.  Ralph  Cone  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Capilond* ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  4^., 
for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Robert  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Bere.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  Richard 
Stanbard  of  Capilande  and  Geoffry  de  Ponte  of  the  same 
are  suspected  of  the  same  death.  Therefore  let  them  be 
exacted  and  outlawed.'  Richard  and  Geoffry  were  in  the 
tithing  of  Capilond*.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Richard's 
chattels,  8j.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  Geoffry  had 
no  chattels.  Afterwards  Ralph  de  Montesorell'  came  and  made 
fine  for  Richard  that  he  might  be  under  pledges  if  anyone  should 
wish  to  sue  him,  and  he  offered  our  lord  the  King  100^.,  and  it  is 
received,  by  pledge  of  Robert  de  la  Val,  Roger  de  Mere,  Robert 
de  Dilinton,  and  Robert  de  Mere. 

1 183.  Roger  de  Stoke  was  crushed  to  death  by  an  oak 
which  fell  upon  him.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not  suspected. 
Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  oak  6^/.,  for  which  the 
sheriff  must  answer. 

1 184.  Agatha,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Mortuo  Mari, 
appealed  Walter  Spiring  and  William  Golde  of  the  death  of  her 
husband,  and  they  were  outlawed  for  that  death.  John  Chyu 
and  Jordan  son  of  Folic'  are  likewise  suspected  of  that  death. 
Therefore   let   them   be  exacted   and  outlawed.      Walter  wi 

>  Ashill.  >  Capland,  a  tithing  of  Broadway.  >  They  V^^ 


312  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

in  the  tithing  of  Capilond;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  William 
was  harboured  upon  the  land  of  the  Hospitallers  of  Apse. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  John  was  in  the  tithing  of  VVest- 
hache  ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Jordan  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Hache  Beauchampe.  Walter,  William  and  Jordan  had  no 
chattels.  John  Chiu*s  chattels,  4^.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1 185.  Elias  Munjoye  de  la  Se,  arrested  for  larceny,  came 
and  defended  ever>'thing,  and  put  himself  upon  the  country. 
The  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.     Therefore  he  is  quit. 

1 1 86.  Walter  son  of  Walter  de  la  Breche,  John  his  son, 
Walter  le  Soper,  and  Ranulf  Chiu,  arrested  on  the  appeal  of 
Robert  Binde  Devel  came,  and  the  jurors  say  that  they  beat 
him  and  threw  him  off  his  lord's  horse.  Therefore  all  are  in 
mercy. 

1 1 87.  William  de  Barri  appealed  Walter  de  la  Breche  and 
the  beforenamed  Walter  le  Soper  and  Ranulf  Chiu  that  they 
beat  and  badly  treated  him.  All  came,  except  Walter  le  Soper 
who  was  not  attached,  and  defended  everything.  The  jurors 
testify  that  they  beat  him  as  he  appealed  them.  Therefore  all 
are  in  mercy.  The  jurors  say  that  they  did  not  rob  him,  and  he 
appealed  them  of  robbery.  Thereupon  he  is  in  mercy  for  his 
false  appeal.  Afterwards  William  de  Barri  came  and  made 
fine  for  his  amercement  for  ^  mark  by  pledge  of  Ralph  de 
Munsorel.  Afterwards  Walter  son  of  Walter,  John  his  son, 
Walter  Soper,  and  Ranulf  Chiu  came  and  made  fine  for  4  marks 
by  pledge  of  Henry  le  Hundredesman,  Gervase  de  Hache, 
Adam  de  Miridon',  and  William  de  Mercez. 

1 188.  Concerning  ladies,  they  say  that  Sabina,  formerly  the 
wife  of  Henry  de  Ortiaco,  has  the  hundred  of  Abbedik,  and 
holds  in  chief  of  our  lord  the  King.  She  is  a  widow  and  in  the 
gift  of  our  lord  the  King.  The  jurors  present  that  Joan,  who  was 
the  daughter  of  William  de  Estre,  was  in  the  gift  of  our  lord  the 
King,  and  Robert  de  Pavelly  has  married  her,  and  holds  Bike- 
hull,*  which  is  worth  looj. 

1 1 89.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Monte 
Acuto,  Robert  de  Mucegros,  Walter  Bussel,  Hugh  Bochard, 
Geoffry  Black  {Niger)  of  Kori  Malet,  Richard  de  Blaminst*, 
Jordan  de  Blaterne  of  la  Pile,  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of 

»  Bkknell. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  313 


Richard  de  Stokes,  and  Richard  de  Munt  Sorel  did  not  come 
on  the  first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1 190.  Ralph  Morel,  arrested  for  larceny,  came  and  defended 
everything,  and  put  himself  upon  the  country.  The  jurors  testify 
that  he  is  guilty.  Therefore,  etc.^  His  chattels,  Ss.^  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  answer.  The  year  [and  a  day]  of  our  lord  the 
King,  and  waste,  to  wit,  of  one  ferling  of  land  worth  8j.,  for 
which  the  same  sheriff  must  answer.  Afterwards  John  de 
Neyrford',  servant  of  Robert  de  Pavely,  came  and  took  the  year 
and  waste  to  the  use  of  his  lord  for  los,  by  pledge  of  Robert  de 
Seyn  Clere.* 

Manb,  2^d, 

The  Hundred  of  Nortkuri*  comes  by  twelve. 

1 191.  Simon  Rugge  killed  Ranulf  Parel,  and  fled.  Therefore 
let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of 
Ralph  Pelitun  in  Nortkuri.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His 
chattels,  5^.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  The  jurors  did 
not  present  the  finder.     Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1 192.  Ralph  de  la  Hurne  and  Robert  Ay Imer  were  suspected 
of  larceny,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  out- 
lawed. Ralph  was  in  the  tithing  of  Torne.*  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  Robert  was  in  the  same  tithing.  Therefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  Their  chattels,  ^  mark,  for  which  the  same  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1 193.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  James  son  of 
Robert  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore  he  is  in 
mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Andredesfeld**  comes  by  twelve. 

1194.  Geoffry  le  Roke  appealed  Ralph  de  la  Rode  that  he 
beat  and  mayhemed  him  and  he  used  no  words  upon  which  there 
could  be  battle  between  them.*  Ralph  came  and  put  himself  upon 
the  country.    The  jurors  testify  that  he  beat  Geoffry  and  disgrace- 

^  The  marginal  note  tells  us  that  he  was  hanged. 

'  See  note  to  No.  981.     Robert  de  Pavely  bought  out  the  King  for  lOj. 
'  North  Curry.  *  Thome  Falcon. 

*  Andersneld. 

^  A  man  who  was  mayhemed  was  not  bound  to  deraign  by  his  body.     His  injury 
would  make  the  duel  unfair. 

2   S 


314  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


fully  used  him.  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in  cus- 
tody. Afterwards  Ralph  came  and  made  fine  for  I  mark  by 
pledge  of  Thomas  de  Reyny  and  William  de  Poketeston. 

1 195.  [The  house  of]  Laurence  de  Millecumbe  was  burned, 
and  Wymarka  his  daughter  was  burned  in  it.  The  jurors  did  not 
present  the  finder.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  Wymarca  was 
buried  without  view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore  the  township  of 
Mcllecumbe  is  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Munketon'  comes  by  six. 

1 196.  Robert  Pere  and  Walter  Cole  wounded  John  Albre  so 
that  he  died.  Therefore  let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed. 
Robert  and  Walter  were  in  the  tithing  of  Muneketon.  There- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.  Robert  Pere's  chattels,  ys.y  for  which  the 
same  sheriff  must  answer.  Walter  had  no  chattels.  The 
jurors  present  that  this  [deed]  was  done  by  night,  and  the 
coroners  say  that  it  happened  by  day.  Therefore  [the  jurors] 
are  in  mercy  for  false  presentment.^  And  because  the  township 
of  Muneketon  did  not  make  pursuit,  it  is  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Bromfeld  comes  by  six 

1197.  And  says  nothing. 

The  Hundred  of  Bulestan'  comes  by  twelve. 

1 198.  Stephen  the  carpenter  killed  Nicholas  son  of  Luke  in 
the  fields  of  Drayton,  and  fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  Stephen  was  in  the  tithing  of  Drayton'.  There- 
lore  it  is  in  mercy.  Likewise  because  [Nicholas]  was  buried 
without  view  of  the  coroners,  the  township  of  Drayton  is  in 
mercy.  Likewise  because  it  made  no  pursuit,  the  same  township 
is  in  mercy.  Stephen's  chattels,  5^.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1 199.  William  de  Lungcspey  was  drowned  from  a  certain 
boat.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price 
of  the  boat,  8^/.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff  must  answer. 

1200.  Margery  wife  of  William  de  Westowe  appealed  John 
Lungespey  of  the  death  of  Gilbert  her  son.  John  was  outlawed 
upon  the  suit  of  Margery.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Swell. 
Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.     He  had  no  chattels. 

^  The  coroners'  rolls  almost  always  prevailed  where  ^tateluents  diflfered. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  315 


1 201.  An  unknown  man  found  dead  between  Duueliz  and 
Whytelegh.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not  suspected.  No 
Englishry ;  therefore  murder.     And  the  township  ^ 

1202.  Joan  daughter  of  Robert  de  la  Stane  fell  dead  by  her 
father's  side  {Jiixta  patrem  suum),  and  the  township  of  Curirevell 
buried  her  without  view  of  the  coroners.    Therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1 203.  Roger  Ic  Newman  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  of  the 
mainpast  of  Eustace  de  Duueliz.  Therefore  [Eustace]  is  in 
mercy.  [Roger's]  chattels,  2'js.  8^.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1204.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Thomas  de  Perham 
and  William  de  Stanton  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  There- 
fore they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Hundred  of  Milverton  comes  by  twelve. 

1205.  A  certain  unknown  man  was  found  killed  in  the 
common  street  (comuni  stratu)  near  May  den  well*.  No  Eng- 
lishry ;  therefore  murder. 

1 206.  Walter  Terry  and  Thomas  de  Thorne,  arrested  for  the 
death  of  a  certain  man  killed  at  Tome,"  came  and  defended 
everything,  and  put  themselves  upon  the  country.  The  jurors 
and  the  four  neighbouring  townships  testify  that  Thomas  de 
Thorne  is  not  guilty.  Therefore  he  is  quit.  They  say  that 
Walter  is  guilty.  Therefore,  etc.*  Walter  de  la  Berghe  and 
Sewell  (^Sewalus)  son  of  Gilbert  were  attached  for  that  death. 
They  do  not  come.  Therefore  they  and  their  pledges  are  in 
mercy.  Walter  was  attached  by  William  de  Bruges*  and 
Hamon  de  Perton.  Sewell  was  attached  by  Roger  de  Blake- 
ford'  and  Robert  Martin.  The  jurors  testify  that  the  aforesaid 
Walter  de  la  Berghe  and  Sewell  are  not  guilty.  Therefore  they 
are  quit.  Walter  Terri's  chattels,  2j.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1207.  Henry  de  Reyny  appealed  William  de  Theynebir' 
and  Geoffry  le  Muner  of  Badialton  for  that  they  beat  and 
badly  used  him.  Henry  does  not  come  ;  therefore  he  and  his 
pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Hervi  de  Stanlegh' 
and   William  Bulfinche.     Let  him  [Henry]  be  taken.     Geoffry 

*  The  entry  stops  here.  '  Thorne  St.  Margaret. 

'  **  Stds.*"  in  the  margin.  *  "06**  written  over  ih;s  name. 


3l6  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

the  Miller  {Molendinus)  does  not  come.  He  was  attached  by 
Robert  le  Kingeof  Ba[d]ialton^  and  Robert  the  baker  {le  Pestur) 
of  the  same.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  William  comes,  and 
the  jurors  testify  that  he  beat  him  [Henry].  Therefore  he  is  in 
mercy.  Let  him  be  in  custody.  Afterwards  William  came  and 
made  fine  for  i  mark  by  pledge  of  William  de  Orewey  and 
Reginald  the  Young  {le  Jouen), 

1208.  Thomas  Cok'  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and  fled. 
Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  dwelt  at 
Smithehey.  Therefore  [the  township]  is  in  mercy.  His  chat- 
tels, 3 J.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer.  The  jurors  are  in 
mercy  for  their  transgression.* 

1209.  Osbert  de  Smithenhey  killed  Walter  de  la  Rugge,  and 
fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in 
the  tithing  of  Smithenhay.  Therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His 
chattels,  2i-.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff  must  answer. 

1 2 10.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  John  Arundel, 
Simon  de  Luccombe,  Baldwin  de  Thome,  John  de  Legh',  Jordan 
de  Erpeford.  Thomas  de  Thorn,  Hugh  of  the  mill  of  Thorn*,  and 
Simon  de  Lucumbe  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Langeford'  comes  by  six. 

121 1.  A  certain  poor  womai^  who  had  the  falling  sickness 
{morbus  caducus^)  fell  dead  at  Sushaldewell.  The  first  finder 
comes  and  is  not  suspected.     Judgment,  misadventure. 

1 2 12.  Nicholas  the  chaplain  of  Langeford'*  was  found  dead 
at  Burdon',  and  the  jurors  concealed  the  matter.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Manor  of  Milverton*  comes  by  twelve. 

12 1 3.  Nicholas  the  chaplain  fell  dead  from  his  horse.  No 
one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  horse, 
2s.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff  must  answer.  The  township  of 
Milverton  buried  him  without 'view  of  the  coroners.  Therefore 
it  is  in  mercy. 

12 14.  Hugh  Leude  was  pressed  to  death  in  a  certain  marlpit. 
No  one  is  suspected.     Judgment,  misadventure.     Because  the 

*  Bathealton.  *  What  their  fault  was  does  not  appear. 

'  Epilepsy.  *  Langford  fiudville. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  3^7 


township  of  Milverton  buried  him  without  view  of  the  coroners, 
it  is  in  mercy. 

1 21 5.  Walter  Colkin  was  drowned  in  the  pond  of  William 
Smalbrok.  No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder.  The  jurors 
falsely  presented  Englishry ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 
Robert  le  Soper  falsely  presented  himself  as  kinsman.  There- 
fore he  is  in  mercy.  Afterwards  Robert  le  Sopcr  came  and 
made  fine  for  ^  mark  by  pledge  of  Herman  de  Milverton*, 
J  ordan  de  la  Putte,  and  John  de  Bosco. 

Memb,  25. 

The  Manor  of  Milverton— continued. 

1216.  Benedict  de  Monte  appealed  Richard  de  Glouc'  of 
Haggele  of  the  death  of  William  Hersona  his  brother,  and 
Benedict  comes  and  sues  against  him.  Richard  does  not  come, 
and  the  jurors  say  that  he  is  guilty.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted 
and  outlawed.  He  was  received  at  Haggelegh'  in  the  county 
of  Somerset  and  at  Dutiigston'  in  the  county  of  Devon.  There- 
fore [those  townships*]  are  in  mercy.  Likewise  [the  township 
of]  Haggelegh  is  in  mercy  because  it  did  not  come  before  the 
justices.     He  had  no  chattels. 

The  Hundred  of  Superton'*  comes  by  twelve. 

1 2 17.  Godfrey  Pek  killed  Nicholas  de  le  Pen,  and  fled. 
Humphrey  and  Hugh  brothers  of  the  said  Nicholas  appealed 
Godfrey  and  William  Cal  of  the  death,  and  both  were  outlawed 
upon  the  suit  of  Humphrey  and  Hugh.  Godfrey  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Ilton' ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  William  was  in  the 
tithing  of  Cerde  Episcopi  ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors 
did  not  present  the  outlawry  ;  therefore  they  arc  in  mercy. 

12 18.  Joan  de  Cudcwurth'  appealed  William  son  of  William 
and  Richard  his  brother,  Benedict  Morin,  and  Oliver  de  Wate- 
legh*  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  robbery.  The  same 
Joan  appealed  Alan  de  Furneaus  of  inciting.  Joan  did  not 
come,  nor  had  she  any  pledge  except  [her]  faith.  None  of  the 
appealed,  except  Benedict  Morin  and  Alan  de  Furneaus,  came. 
The  jurors  testify  that  they  are  not  guilty,  but  they  say  that 

'  It  U  clear  that  both  townsh'ps  arc  amerced,  from  the  marginal  note. 
'  South  Peihercton. 


3l8  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


they  are  agreed.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  Let  them  be 
in  custody.  William  son  of  William  did  not  come.  He  was 
attached  by  Luke  de  Doueliz  and  Roger  le  Tannur  of  la 
Wurth.  Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  Richard  his  brother 
was  attached  by  Roger  de  la  Wurth  and  William  de  Cude- 
wurth*.  Oliver  was  attached  by  Roger  de  Wattelcgh  and 
Nicholas  de  Wattelegh.     Therefore  all  are  in  mercy. 

1 2 19.  Adam  de  Legh'  and  Agnes  his  wife  appealed  Peter 
de  Legh  and  Philip  his  brother  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the 
King  and  of  wounds.  Adam  and  Agnes  do  not  come.  There- 
fore they  and  their  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit, 
Henry  de  Hakewell  and  Henry  de  Lancecumbe.  Peter  and 
Philip  come,  and  the  jury  testify  that  they  are  not  agreed,  but 
they  say  that  Peter  beat  Agnes  and  wounded  her  in  the  head 
with  a  certain  club ;  therefore  he  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  in 
custody.  They  say  that  Philip  is  not  guilty  ;  therefore  he  is 
quit.  Adam  and  Agnes  are  in  mercy  for  their  false  appeal. 
Let  them  be  taken.  Afterwards  Peter  came  and  made  fine  for 
20s.  by  pledge  of  Robert  de  la  Linde  and  Henry  de  Lance- 
kumbe. 

1220.  Kipping  de  Burehenton*  was  drowned  beneath  the 
wheel  of  a  certain  mill.  No  one  is  suspected.  Judgment,  mis- 
adventure. Price  of  the  wheel  2J.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff 
must  answer. 

1 22 1.  Walter  de  la  Wyk'  killed  Wyot  de  Cumpton*,  and  fled 
to  the  church  of  Septon',  confessed  the  deed,  and  abjured  the 
realm.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Schepton*.^  1  herefore  it  is  in 
mercy.  His  chattels,  Ss.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff  must 
answer.  The  township  ofSchepton*  made  no  pursuit.  There- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors  present  that  this  deed  was  done 
by  night,  and  the  coroners  say  that  it  was  by  day.  Therefore 
they  [the  jurors]  are  in  mercy. 

1222.  Henry  de  Ludehegh*  killed  Henry  de  Lihenhors,  and 
fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in 
the  tithing  of  Kingeston'  in  the  hundred  of  Tintenhull'.  There- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.  He  had  no  chattels.  The  township  of  Bil- 
lington  did  not  make  pursuit  ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1223.  Hugh  Doget  appealed  Benedict  Morin  for  that,  on  the 
day  next  after  the  feast  of  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary 
three   years   ago,  he  came  to  where  he   [Hugh]  was,  between 

*  Shepton  Beau  chair  p. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  319 


Duueliz*  and  Cudewurth,"  and  struck  him  on  the  head  with  a 
club  so  that  he  felled  him  to  the  ground,  and  inflicted  upon 
him  two  wounds  in  his  left  arm  with  a  knife ;  and  that  he  did 
this  wickedly  and  feloniously  and  against  the  peace  of  our 
lord  the  King,  he  [Hugh]  offers  to  deraign  against  him  by  his 
body  as  the  court  shall  consider.  Benedict  came  and  defended 
the  breach  of  the  peace  of  our  lord  the  King  and  the  wounds 
and  everything  word  for  word,  and  this  he  offers  to  defend  by 
his  body  as  the  court  shall  consider.  And  because  his  wounds 
were  seen  to  be  recent,  and  suit  was  sufficiently  made,  it  is  con- 
sidered that  there  should  be  battle  between  them,  and  that 
Benedict  should  give  gage  to  defend,  and  Hugh  should  give 
gage  to  deraign.  Benedict's  pledges:  Andrew  Wak\  Robert 
de  Dillington',  Richard  Bordel,  and  Peter  Waynheb  .  .  . 
Hugh's  pledges ' 

1224.  William  Waygnoben  killed  Christiana  Burel  with  a 
knife,  and  fled,  and  was  outlawed  upon  the  suit  of  Richard, 
Christiana's  brother.  He  was  in  the  tithing  of  Duueliz;  there- 
fore it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels,  loj.,  for  which  the  same 
sheriff  must  answer.  The  [township  of]  Duueliz  Wak'  did 
not  make  pursuit ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1225.  Laurence  de  Glouc'  fled  to  the  church  of  Schepton' 
and  confessed  that  he  killed  Grace  de  la  Fenne.  That  matter 
[was]  elsewhere  in  the  hundred  of  Mertoke.*  The  township  of 
Schepeton'  did  not  make  pursuit ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy. 

1226.  Gcoffry  Pape  appealed  Roger  le  Pyn,  Hugh  his 
brother,  and  William  Kene  for  that  they  beat  and  disgrace- 
fully used  him,  and  because  the  appeal  is  null  let  inquest  be 
made,  etc.  All  the  appealed  come,  and  the  jurors  testify  that 
all  are  guilty.  Therefore  all  are  in  mercy.  Let  them  be  in 
custody.  Afterwards  all  the  appealed  came  and  made  fine 
for  205".  by  pledge  of  Ranulf  the  reeve  of  Curri  Malet  and 
William  le  Bedel  of  the  same. 

1227.  Thomas  Pigaz,  arrested  for  larceny,  came  and  defended 
everything.  The  jurors  testify  that  he  is  not  guilty.  Therefore 
he  is  quit. 

1228.  Concerning  minors  {devalettis\  they  say  that  Ralph 

»  Dowlish  Wake.  «  Cudworth. 

'  Here  the  record  of  a  very  good  instance  of  an  appeal  to  be  decided  by  a  duel 
ends. 

^  There  is  no  mention  of  ih's  under  the  hundred  of  Martock,  Qumn^  wheClMr 
[was]  should  be  [is]. 


320  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

de  Albiniaco  holds  (tenet)  the  manor  of  Superton  of  the  gift 
of  our  lord  the  King,  who  gave  it  to  Phihp  his  father  {et  iilud 
dedit  Philipo  patri  suo).  That  land  was  an  escheat  of  the 
Norman  [lands],  and  is  worth  per  annum  £^o.  Eustace  de 
Doueliz  holds  Wyggebergh'^  in  right  of  his  wife  by  serjeanty, 
that  he  should  be  usher  in  the  hall  of  our  lord  the  King. 

1229.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  the  land  of  the 
Prior  of  Bruyton*  in  Perton*  and  the  men  of  the  Templars  of 
Lepenne,  Ralph  de  Albiniaco,  William  de  Wydewurth*,  and 
Thomas  de  Gosshuir,  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

1230.  Adam  Crestrcll,  arrested  for  larceny,  came  and  de- 
fended everything,  and  put  himself  upon  the  country.  The 
jurors  testify  that  he  is  guilty.  Therefore,  etc.*  His  chattels, 
38J.  7^/.,  for  which  the  same  sheriff  must  answer. 

Memb,  2$d. 

The  Hundred  of  Superton' — continued. 

1 23 1.  William  son  of  Adam  Crestred,  Roger  Tubbe  of  West- 
cumbeland',  and  Walter  King  are  suspected  of  larceny.  There- 
fore let  them  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  William  was  received 
in  the  land  of  the  Templars  at  Westcumbelond*.  Therefore  it 
is  in  mercy. 

1232.  William  le  Picher  and  Sampson  de  Watechet,  arrested 
for  larceny,  came  and  defended  everything,  and  put  themselves 
upon  the  country.  The  jurors  and  the  four  nearest  townships 
testify  that  they  are  guilty.  Therefore  let  them  be  hanged. 
They  had  no  chattels. 

The  Hundred  of  Caninton'  comes  by  twelve. 

1233.  Nicholas  the  miller  of  Fitinton'  fell  beneath  the  wheel 
of  a  certain  mill,  and  was  so  hurt  that  he  died.  No  one  is  sus- 
pected. Judgment,  misadventure.  Price  of  the  wheel  12^.,  for 
which  the  sheriff,  etc. 

1234.  Malefactors  came  to  the  house  of  Edith  daughter  of 

^  Wigborough,  in  South  Petherton(?)     See  No.  1127.     See  HazliU*s  "Tenures," 

P-  370- 

*  This  is  common  form  for  the  capital  sentence — The  man  was  hanged,  as  tl.e 

marginal  note  tells  us.  ^  Cannington. 


SOMERSETiSHIRE   PLEAS.  32 1 

Gunilda  and  burgled  it.      The  twelve  jurors  did  not  present  any 
attachment ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1235.  Robert  Barat  hanged  himself.  No  one  else  is  sus- 
pected.   Judgment,  felonia  de  se  ipso.     He  had  no  chattels. 

1236.  William  de  Chaundoys  fell  dead  in  the  way  by  {versus) 
the  well  of  St.  Michael.  The  first  finder  comes  and  is  not  sus- 
pected.    No  Englishry  ;  therefore  murder. 

1237.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  Stephen  de  la  Merse, 
appealed  Robert  de  Blakemor  of  rape.  Robert  does  not  come. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Thorstan  de 
Burcy  and  Robert  de  Koker. 

1238.  Robert  Rosel  was  drowned  from  a  certain  boat * 

1239.  William  Attehildeweye^  was  suspected  of  larceny,  and 
fled.  Therefore  let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  in 
the  tithing  of  Essehelde  ;  therefore  it  is  in  mercy.  His  chattels, 
lOi".,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

1240.  Certain  fairs  {nundine)  are  [held]  at  Fitinton,  and  there 
they  take  customs,  without  warrant,  as  [the  jurors]  believe. 

\2j^i.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  John  de  Neviir, 
Robert  de  Eston*,  John  the  hay  ward,  William  de  Dray,  and 
Ralph  Doget  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy. 

1242.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  Stephen  de  Merse,  is  in 
mercy  for  her  transgression. 

The  Burgh  of  Stoke  Curcy  comes  by  twelve. 

1243.  John  de  Rechich'  beat  one  Juliana  daughter  of  May- 
nard,  so  that  he  killed  her  boy  in  her  womb,  and  fled.  Therefore 
let  him  be  exacted  and  outlawed.  He  was  received  at  Stoke 
Curcy.  Therefore  [that  township]  is  in  mercy.  The  jurors 
concealed  that  matter  ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  He  had  no 
chattels. 

The  Hundred  of  Cruk'^  comes  by  twelve, 

1244.  Walter  Huberd,  indicted  for  larceny,  fled  to  the 
church  of  Cruk',  confessed  the  larceny,  and  abjured  the  realm. 
He  was  received  at  Cruk'.  Therefore  [the  township]  is  in  mercy. 
His  chattels,  I2^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff  must  answer. 

^  This  entry  is  incomplete. 

^  This  name  was  originally  written  as  ''  William  de  Halewaye,"  and  b  altered  to 
**  Attehildeweye."  •  Crewkemc. 

2    T 


322  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

1245.  Roger  Burnel,  having  the  falling  sickness,  was  drowned 
in  the  water  of  Essehe.  Lucy  de  Othull,  the  first  finder,  comes 
and  is  not  suspected.     No  Englishry ;  therefore  murder. 

1246.  The  clapper  of  a  h«ll  in  the  church  of  Cruk'  fell  on 
the  head  of  Walter  Knoll  so  that  he  was  killed.  Judgment, 
misadventure.  Price  of  the  clapper  6^/.,  for  which  the  sheriff 
must  answer.  The  jurors  present  that  view  was  made  by  the 
coroner,  and  the  coroner  says  that  he  did  not  see  him.  There- 
fore [the  jurors]  are  in  mercy  for  false  presentment.  And  because 
the  township  of  Cruk'  buried  him  without  view  of  the  coroner, 
it  is  in  mercy. 

1247.  Touching  the  sale  of  wines,  they  say  that  Robert  de 
Cruke  and  Henry  de  Exon  have  sold  wine  contrary  to  the 
assize.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 

1248.  Concerning  cloths,  they  say  that  Ranulf  Menge  and 
Richard  Trice  have  sold  cloth  contrary  to  the  assize.  Therefore 
they  are  in  mercy. 

1249.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  Walter  de  Ely, 
Henry  de  Seinmor,  Richard  the  butler  {Pincema),  William  de 
Clavile,  Robert  de  Clavile,  Warreis  de  Escumbe,  John  de  Bosco, 
Baldwin  de  Clopton,  William  de  Insula,  Robert  de  Mullent, 
Richard  the  chaplain,  Serlo  the  cook,  and  Richard  Waling  did 
not  come  on  the  first  day.     Therefore  they  are  in  mercy. 


The  Hundred  of  Dulverton  comes  by  six 

1250.  And  they  say  nothing. 

The  Manor  of  Wyneford^  comes  by  six. 

125 1.  Concerning  defaults,  they  say  that  William  de  Ripariis 
and  William  de  Blakeford  did  not  come  on  the  first  day.  There- 
fore they  are  in  mercy. 

The  Township  of  Ivelcestr'^  comes  by  twelve. 

1252.  A  certain  approver  escaped  from  the  prison  of 
Ivelcestr'  and  fled  to  the  church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  in 
the  time  of  Joel  de  Valetorta.'  Therefore  to  judgment  upon 
him  [Joel]. 

1  Winsford.  «  Ilchester,  »  The  sheriff. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  323 

1253.  Two  thieves,  who  were  adjudged,  by  the  justices 
assigned  to  deliver  the  gaols,  to  be  hanged  and  were  delivered 
to  William  de  Wellesle  to  execute  the  judgment  upon  them, 
fled  to  the  church  of  St.  Mary  the  greater,  and  thence  by  night 
escaped.     Therefore  to  judgment  for  the  escape, 

1254.  A  certain  she-thief  (Jatrona),  who  sought  victuals  for 
the  use  of  the  thieves  who  were  in  the  gaol,  betook  herself  to  the 
church  of  St.  John  and  abjured  the  realm.  Therefore  to  judg- 
ment for  the  escape. 

1255.  Four  thieves  escaped  from  the  gaol  and  fled  to  the 
church  of  the  Blessed  Mary  and  abjured  the  realm.  One  of 
them  was  committed  to  gaol  by  the  Bishop  of  Salisbury,  to 
whom  he  had  been  delivered.  Therefore  to  judgment  on  the 
Bishop. 

1256.  Agnes  son  of  Geoffry  de  Guneir  appealed  Nicholas 
le  Fardeyn'  of  rape.  She  did  not  come,  nor  had  she  any  pledge 
except  [her]  faith.  Nicholas  comes,  and  the  jurors  testify  that 
he  is  not  guilty;  therefore  he  is  quit.  And  let  Agnes  be 
taken. 

1257.  Adam  Smalprud  was  taken  upon  suspicion  of  larceny, 
and  liberated  [when]  Joel  de  Valetorta  [was]  sheriflF.  It  is 
not  known  what  became  of  him.  Therefore  the  sheriff"  must 
answer. 

1258.  John  de  Balun  encroached  on  (artavit)  the  King's 
highway  {viam  rega/em)  outside  the  east  gate.  The  sheriff"  is 
therefore  ordered  that  he  should  restore  the  same,  and  that  it 
should  be  as  it  was  wont  to  be. 

1259.  Touching  new  customs,  they  say  that  the  lord  of 
Northover  takes  tolls  not  according  to  custom  (consuetudines  non 
consnetas\  and  it  is  not  known  by  what  warrant.  Therefore  this 
must  be  discussed. 

1260.  Concerning  churches  which  are  in  the  gift  of  our  lord 
the  King,  they  say  that  the  church  of  St.  John  the  Baptist  is  in 
the  gift  our  lord  the  King,  and  Henry  de  Bath'  holds  it 

1 261.  Concerning  the  sale  of  wines,  they  say  that  Gervase 
Trice,  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  Ranulf  le  Albc,  Mathew 
de  Bristold',  Hugh  Ruff'us,  and  Henry  the  vintner*  {vinetarius)^ 
have  sold  wine  contrary  to  the  assize.  Therefore  they  are  in 
mercy. 

1262.  Concerning  cloth  sold  against  the  assize,  they  say  that 

^  This  name  is  struck  oat  and  *' alUn*^  written  orer  it 


324  SOMEKSETSHIkE    PLEAS. 


Stephen  Ruffus  has  sold  cloth  against  the  assize.     Therefore  he 
is  in  mercy. 

1 263.  Concerning  strangers,  sellers  of  wine  in  this  eyre,  they 
say  that  Walter  de  Kentilesberg*,  John  de  Exton*,  and  Henry 
the  vintner,  have  sold  wine  against  the  assize.  Therefore  they 
are  in  mercy. 

1264.  Roger  Gaderwyn  of  Dorset,  accused  of  larceny,  fled 
to  the  church  of  the  Blessed  Mary  of  Ivelcestr*,  confessed  the 
larceny,  and  abjured  the  realm.  His  chattels,  27^.,  for  which 
the  sheriff  must  answer.  He  was  not  in  tithing  because  a 
stranger. 


ROLL  No.  175.    (Devonshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  a.d.  1244,  28  Hen.  HL 

Memb.  i. 

Pleas  and  assizes  at  Exeter  in  the  county  of  Devon  on  the 
morrow  of  the  Ascension  in  the  twenty-eighth  year  of  the 
reign  of  the  King  before  Roger  de  Thurkileby  and  his 
companions. 

1265.  William  the  archdeacon  of  Tan  ton*  was  summoned  to 
answer  John  Bretache  and  Angareta  his  wife  on  a  plea  that  he 
should  permit  them  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of 
Exeford  which  is  vacant  and  [belongs]  to  them,  etc.,  and 
whereon  they  complain  that  he  unjustly  prevents  them,  and 
thereby  they  are  injured  and  have  [suffered]  damage,  etc.  The 
archdeacon  comes  and  defends  the  force  and  injury,  etc,  and 
says  that  he  has  never  hindered  them  in  presenting  to  the  church, 
nor  has  he  made  any  claim  to  the  advowson  of  the  church, 
but  he  says  that  he  deferred  admitting  their  clerk  because  of 
the  appeal  which  Henry  de  Suleny  made  against  John  and 
Angareta*s  clerk,  so  that  by  lapse  of  time  he  conferred  the  said 
church  with  the  authority  of  the  council  {ita  quod  per  lapsum 
temporis  contulit  predictam  Ecclesiam  auctoritate  consilii)}  John 
and  Angareta  cannot  deny  this.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
the  archdeacon  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  John  is  in  mercy 
Pledge  for  the  amercement,  Wymerus  de  Ralegh. 

^  I  think  that  this  must  refer  to  the  Lateran  council  of  1 179  which  issued  a  canon 
about  the  lapse  of  presentations. 


SO^fERSETSI^RE   PLEAS.  325 


Memb.  22d. 

1266.  The  bailiffs  of  the  city  of  Exeter  offered  themselves  on 
the  fourth  day  against  the  Prior  de  Monteacuto  [on  a  plea]  why 
he  took  tolls  of  the  lawful  men  of  Exeter  coming  to  the  Prior's 
fair  of  T>Titenhuir  and  Homedon  contrary  to  the  liberties  they 
enjoy  by  the  charters  of  the  predecessors  of  our  lord  the  King ; 
and  against  Nicholas  de  Evesham  on  a  plea  why  he  took  tolls  of 
the  same  men  coming  to  the  fair  of  the  same  Nicholas  at  St 
Decuman,  contrary,  etc.  They  do  not  come,  and  they  were 
summoned,  etc  Judgment,  let  them  be  attached  that  they  be 
at  Schyreb'ne  on  the  morrow  of  St     .    .    . 

1267.  William  Lungespeye  puts  in  his  place  Gilbert  Gras- 
senleyl  or  John  de  Trowbir,  .  .  .  Erleg',  and  others  named 
in  the  wTit,  on  a  plea  by  what  warrant  they  have  enclosed  a 
park,  etc,  and  [against]  ....  senden'  on  a  plea  of  a 
certain  dyke  raised  in  Kaneford  to  the  injury,  etc,  and 
against  Ralph  B  .  .  .  raised  in  Caneford',  and  against 
Geoffry  son  of  the  chaplain  of  ...  .  etc.,  and  against 
John  Mautravers  concerning  a  park  raised  in  Kane[ford]  .  .  . 
puts  in  her  place  John  her  husband  against  William     .     .     .* 

Mnnb,  33^ 
Essoins  de  malo  venicndi  taken  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity. 

1268.  Nicholas  de  Mer>'et  against  the  mayor  and  citizens  of 
Exeter,  on  a  plea  of  tolls,  etc  by  Adam  de  Lopen.  On  the 
morrow  of  St  John  Baptist  at  Schyrb'ne.  He  has  pledged  his 
faith.« 

1 269.  Philip  de  Aynebaud'  against  the  same  by  Richard  de 
Montesoreir.     He  has  pledged  his  faith. 


ROLL  No.  20a   (Dorsetshire.) 

The  following  pleas  were  taken   in   the  summer  of  a.d.    1244, 
28  Hen.  HI. 

'  The  roll  is  here  UlcgiUe  in  parts.     This  seems  to  be  the  effect  of  what  can  be 
'  In  the  margin  is  the  note  "  w  -f-  alii  I  tri," 


326  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Memb.  i. 

Pleas  and  assizes  at  Schyreburn  in  the  county  of  Dorset,  before 
R.  de  Thurkileby  and  his  companions  in  three  weeks  after 
Trinity  in  the  twenty-eighth  year  of  King  Henry,  son  of 
King  John. 

Memb.  3^. 

1270.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Hugh  dc 
Cnappe  father  of  Thomas  Knappe  was  seised,  etc.  of  one  virgate 
of  land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Knapp^  on  the  day,  etc.,  and 
whether,  etc.  which  land  Lucy  Malet  holds,  who  comes  and 
vouches  to  warranty  Mary  de  Cam.  Let  her  have  her  [Mary] 
on  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael  at  Westminster  by  help  of  the 
court.  And  let  her  be  summoned  in  the  county  of  Norfolk. 
Lucy  puts  in  her  place  Nicholas  de  Hywys. 

1 27 1.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  de  Bodeviir,  is 
in  mercy  for  [her]  transgression  against  Jordan  de  Harpeford,  by 
pledge  of  the  sheriff. 

1272.  William  Fukeram  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Godfrey  de  Aunho  on  a  plea  that  he  should  permit  him 
to  have  the  common  pasture  in  his,  Godfrey's,  wood  in  Heywode 
which  he  [William]  ought  to  have,  etc.  And  Godfrey  did  not 
come,  etc.,  and  he  was  attached  by  Robert  Cauketerre  and 
Thomas  de  Welles.  Therefore  let  him  be  put  under  better 
pledges  that  he  be  at  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael, 
and  let  the  first  [pledges]  be  amerced,  to  wit,  each  of  them  i  mark, 
by  pledge  of  Colin  de  Litleton'.* 

Memb.  4. 

1273.  Mabel  daughter  of  Adam  Balle  seeks  against  Henry 
de  Cunteville  one  messuage  with  the  appurtenances  in  Welle  as 
her  right  and  marriage  portion,  and  in  which  Henry  has  no 
entry  except  by  Ralph  Magod,  to  whom  Thomas  ie  Specer, 
formerly  Mabel's  husband,  demised  it,  and  whom  she,  etc. 
Henry  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  Ralph  Magod,  who 
comes  and  warrants  him  and  defends  her  right  and  such  entry ; 
and  he  positively  defends  that  he  had  entry  in  the  said  messuage 
by  the  said  Ralph  [mistake  for  Thomas],  for  he  had  entry  by 

*  Knapp  in  North  Curry.  ^  See  No.  678. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  327 

Richard  Maugod,  Mabel's  brother,  who  gave  that  messuage  to 
him  by  his  charters,  which  he  proffers,  and  which  testify  this,  etc. 
Mabel  offers  our  lord  the  King  i  mark  to  have  an  inquest 
thereon,  and  it  is  received  by  pledge  of  Oliver  de  Dynam.  The 
sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  cause  twelve  of  the  township  of 
Welles  to  come,  by  whom,  eta,  and  who  now,  etc.,  to  recognise, 
etc  The  jurors  say  that  Ralph  Magod  had  entry  in  the  said 
messuage  by  the  said  Richard  Magod,  Mabel's  brother,  and  not 
by  the  said  Thomas.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Ralph 
[may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Mabel  is  in  mercy.  She  is  a 
pauper. 

1274.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Bryus  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Robert  de  Pavilly  and  Joan  his 
wife  of  their  free  tenement  in  Bygehausle  since  the  first,  etc., 
and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  disseised  them  of  a  certain 
lane  {venella)  and  a  certain  road  {chimynd)^  in  respect  of  which 
he  [Robert]  was  wont  to  take  for  every  great  beast  {grosso 
averio),  going  by  the  said  way  to  the  pasture,  \d.  Robert,  by 
his  attorney,  comes  and  says  that  the  road  is  a  common  road  for 
all  passers,  so  that  Robert  and  Joan  have  no  separate  [interest] 
therein,  neither  in  the  road  nor  in  the  lane.  Robert  de  Pavilly 
and  Joan  cannot  deny  this.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Robert  de  Bryus  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Robert  and  Joan 
are  in  mercy  for  their  false  claim.  They  may  proceed  by 
another  writ  if  they  will. 


Metnb.  4//. 

1275.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Bryus  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Robert  de  Pavilly  and  Joan  his 
wife  of  their  common  of  pasture  in  Curylande,  which  appertains 
to  their  free  tenement  in  Bygthausle,  since  the  first,  etc.  Robert 
does  not  come,  but  William  his  bailiff  comes  and  alleges  nothing 
wherefor  the  assize  should  remain.  The  jurors  say  that  Robert 
de  Bryus  did  unjustly  disseise  the  said  Robert  and  Joan  of  the 
said  pasture.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Robert  and  Joan 
should  recover  their  seisin  by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  Robert  de 
Bryus  is  in  mercy  for  his  disseisin  by  pledge  .  Damages, 
i  mark. 

1276.  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  Warde,  offered 
herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Ralph  Ward  on  a  plea  of  one- 


328  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


third  part  of  ten  acres  of  land,  and  of  half  an  acre  of  meadow, 
and  of  2&/.  of  rent,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Cumpton*  which 
she  claims  in  dower  against  him.  Ralph  did  not  come,  etc.,  and 
he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment,  let  the  one-third  part  be 
taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  etc.,  and  the  day,  etc., 
and  let  him  be  summoned  that  he  be  [here]  on  Tuesday  next 
after  the  festival  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul,  etc  Afterwards 
Ralph  came  and  said  that  she  ought  not  to  have  dower  therein, 
because  the  said  William,  formerly  her  husband,  on  the  day,  etc., 
nor  ever,  etc,  held  the  said  land  in  fee  so  that  he  could  endow 
her  thereout.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered  that  before 
himself,  etc,*  and  according  to  what  he  should  learn  by  that 
inquest  he  should  do  justice. 

Memb.  5. 

1277.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Sara  mother 
of  Edith  was  seised  in  her  demesne,  etc.  of  half  of  one  ferling  of 
land  with  the  appurtenances  in  Adelmundesworthy"  on  the  day 
on  which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  Geoffry  de  Dun- 
heved  holds,  who  comes  and  vouches  to  warranty  Sybil  de 
Pyrhou.  Let  him  have  her  [here]  on  the  octave  of  SS.  Peter 
and  Paul  by  aid  of  the  court  Afterwards  Edith  came  and 
released  all  her  right,  etc,  for  one  tunic  which  Geoffry  gave  her, 
etc,  and  for  js. 

1278.  The  Prior  of  Bermundes',  by  his  attorney,  offered 
himself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Henry,  the  parson  of  Kyne- 
wardeston',  on  a  plea  of  one  messuage  and  half  a  virgate  of  land 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Kynewardeston**  which  the  prior 
claims  against  him  in  right  of  his  church,  etc  Henry  did  not 
come,  etc.,  and  he  made  other  defaults,  to  wit,  before  the  justices 
on  the  last  eyre  at  Ivelcester,  namely,  Roger  de  Thurkileby  and 
his  companions,  so  that  the  land  was  taken  in  the  hand  of  our 
lord  the  King,  and  the  sheriff  notified  the  day  of  taking,  and 
that  he  was  summoned,  etc*  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the 
prior  should  recover  his  seisin  against  him  by  default,  and 
Henry  is  in  mercy. 

1279.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  le  Bere 

^  The  sheriff  is  told  to  hold  an  inquiry,  and  to  act  accordingly. 

'  Almsworthy  in  Exford. 

'  Kingweston.  *  Set  No.  708. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  329 

unjustly,  etc.  disseised  the  Abbot  of  Schyreburn'  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Corfton'  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  he  disseised  him  of  half  a  hide  of  land  with  the 
appurtenances.  Richard  comes  and  fully  confesses  that  a  certain 
covenant  was  made  between  Avice,  Richard's  mother,  and  the 
Abbot  touching  the  said  land,  namely,  that  Avice  gave  and 
granted  to  the  abbot  and  his  convent  of  Schyreburn'  the  whole 
of  the  said  land  for  35  marks,  which  the  abbot  and  convent 
should  pay  for  the  said  land  at  times  agreed  between  them,  and 
for  a  certain  payment  {liberacione)  to  be  taken  for  the  use  of 
Avice  for  life.  And  because  the  abbot  did  not  pay  the  money 
at  the  said  times  he  [Richard]  put  himself  in  seisin  of  the  said 
land.  Because  Richard  cannot  deny  that  the  abbot  was  in 
seisin  of  the  said  land  with  its  appurtenances  as  of  the  gift  and 
grant  of  Avice,  whose  right  the  land  was,  it  is  considered  that 
the  abbot  should  recover  his  seisin  by  view  of  the  recognitors 
and  Richard  is  in  mercy  by  pledge        .     Damages,  10  marks.* 

1280.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Adam  de 
Foukland  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Agnes  de  Aunestowe  of  her 
free  tenement  in  Fouklande  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it 
is  complained  that  he  disseised  her  of  four  virgates  of  land  with 
the  appurtenances.  Adam  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought 
not  to  be  made,  because  in  truth  one  Walter,  her  brother,  gave 
the  land  to  Agnes,  and  that  she  afterwards  gave  the  same  land 
to  him,  Adam,  and  because  she  was  without  the  province  when 
she  made  the  gift  to  him,  and  did  not  dare  to  come  to  his  parts 
because  she  was  excommunicated,  she  made  certain  letters 
patent  to  one  Robert  son  of  William  de  Litlcton  and  Nicholas 
de  Noers  directing  [them]  to  put  him,  Adam,  in  full  seisin  of  the 
said  land,  and  he  proffers  the  same  letters,  which  testify  this 
He  proffers  certain  letters  patent  of  Agnes,  which  testify  that 
she  received  her  rent  for  the  term  of  Easter  in  the  twenty-seventh 
year  of  the  King's  reign.  Agnes  says  that  she  never  gave  him 
any  land  nor  ever  made  any  letters  patent  by  which  he  ought 
to  have  put  himself  in  seisin  of  the  said  land,  nor  any  other 
letters  patent  by  which  Adam  says  she  [admitted]  to  have 
received  the  said  rent,  but  she  will   tell  the  truth.     She  was 

^  The  action  of  novel  disseisin,  of  which  this  is  an  example,  was  purel^r  possessory. 
It  did  not  raise  a  question  of  title.  The  abbot  was  in  seism ;  Richard  disseised  him 
without  judgment  and  within  the  time  of  limitation  ;  therefore  he  was  wrong.  In  the 
margin  is  **  let  him  be  in  custody,"  and  the  usual  '*  mia  "  is  struck  oat.  Evidently 
Ric£aid  did  not  find  the  pledge  lor  which  the  clei k  had  prcpaicd. 

2   U 


330  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


impleaded  in  court  christian  so  that  she  was  excommunicated 
and  feared  lest  she  should  be  taken,  and  she  withdrew  herself 
from  the  province  {extra  provinctani)  and  appointed  the  said 
Adam  her  bailiff,  and  executed  to  him  certain  letters  to  sue 
for  her  in  the  county  [court]  and  in  the  hundred  [court],  and 
that  this  was  so  she  seeks  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that 
Agnes  was  excommunicated  for  a  certain  debt  sought  from  her 
in  court  christian,  and  because  she  feared  to  be  taken  by  the 
sheriff,  she  withdrew  herself  to  remote  parts  {ad  partes  remotas) 
and  appointed  Adam  to  be  her  attorney  to  sue  for  her  in  the 
county  and  hundred  [courts],  and  they  positively  say  that  she 
never  gave  him  the  said  land  nor  executed  to  him  any  charter 
nor  the  said  letters  which  Adam  proffered,  wherefore  they  say 
that  Adam  did  disseise  her  unjustly,  etc,  as  the  writ  says. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Agnes  should  recover  her  seisin, 
and  Adam  is  in  mercy.  Let  him  be  committed  to  gaol.  After- 
wards it  is  testified  that  the  sheriff  allowed  him  to  go  free. 
Therefore  let  him  answer,  etc.  Pledges  for  Adam's  amercement 
William  de  Curtenay  and  Geoffry  de  Dunheved.  Damages, 
ID  marks. 

Memb.  5^/. 

1 28 1.  Mary,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  de  Bluntvill', 
offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Robert  de  Sancto 
Claro  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  one  virgate  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Bykehull',  and  against  Edith,  formerly 
the  wife  of  Gervase  de  Bykehuir,  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of 
one-third  part  of  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  the  same  vill,  which  third  parts  she  claims  in  dower  against 
them.  They  do  not  come,  etc.,  and  they  were  summoned,  etc. 
Judgment,  let  the  third  parts  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord 
the  King,  and  the  day,  etc.  And  let  them  be  summoned  that 
they  be  [here]  on  Saturday,  etc.  The  sheriff  is  notified,  etc 
Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  Robert  gives  \  mark  for  a 
licence  to  agree  by  pledge  of  Ralph  de  Ferr*.  The  agreement 
is  that  Mary  should  release  the  whole  for  40?.,  which  Robert 
gives  her,  etc. 

1282.  Margery  de  Flury  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  William  de  Grennevill  on  a  plea  that  he,  togetlier  with 
Joan  his  wife,  should  give  up  to  her  ten  acres  of  land  and  one 
mill,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Langeford,  which  she  claims 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  33 1 


against  them  as  her  right  and  marriage  portion.  William  did 
not  come,  etc.  And  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment,  let  the 
land  and  mill  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and 
the  day,  etc.  and  let  him  be  summoned  that  he  be  [here]  on 
Tuesday,  etc.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Joan  wife  of  William 
///  banco. 

Memb,  7. 

1283.  Isolt,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Blokkesworth, 
seeks  against  William  Maunsel  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Were,  and  against  Geoffry  Pruz  nine  acres  of 
land  and  six  acres  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Bagge- 
worthe,  and  against  Richard  de  Weston'  and  Robert  Screppe 
twenty-eight  acres  and  one  perch  of  land,  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Weston',  as  her  right  and  inheritance,  and  in  which 
they  have  no  entry  otherwise  than  by  the  said  Robert,  formerly 
husband  of  Isolt,  whom  she  in  his  lifetime,  etc.  William  and 
all  the  others,  except  Robert  Screppe,  come.  William  and 
Richard  vouch  to  warranty  Henry  son  of  Robert  de  Blokkes- 
worth. Let  them  have  him  on  Sunday,  etc.  Geoffry  Pruc 
comes,  and  they  are  agreed  by  licence,  and  have  the  chirograph. 
On  the  day  the  said  Henry  did  not  come ;  therefore  of  his 
land  let  there  be  taken  to  the  value,  etc.,  and  let  him  come  on 
Tuesday.  Afterwards  it  is  testified  that  the  said  Henry  dwells 
(jnanet)  in  the  county  of  Lincoln.  Therefore  let  him  be  sum- 
moned that  he  be  at  Westminster  on  the  octave  of  St.  Michael. 
The  same  day  is  given  to  William  and  Richard  in  banco} 

Memb,  8. 

1284.  Maurice  de  Borham  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  John  Moryn  on  a  plea  that  he  should  pay  him  16  marks 
which  he  owes  him,  and  unjustly,  etc.  John  did  not  come,  etc 
He  made  other  defaults,  to  wit,  before  the  justices,  on  the  last 
eyre  at  Ivelcestr',  so  that  the  sheriff  was  ordered  to  distrain  him 
by  his  lands  and  chattels,  etc.,  and  that  he  should  have  his  body 
on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  into  the  county  of  Dorset* 
The  sheriff  testifies  that  he  notified  William  Payn,  bailiff  of 

^  It  is  obvious  that  this  entry  was  written  from  time  to  time  in  the  order  of  events. 
There  is  in  the  margin  below  the  county  name,  the  note  "•^" 
»  See  No.  728. 


332  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Tampton',  who  did  nothing.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered  as 
before.  Afterwards  the  sheriff  comes  and  testifies  that  the  said 
John  has  nothing  in  this  county  beyond  a  rent  of  5  marks,  and 
that  he  has  in  the  county  of  Surrey  a  sufficiency  of  land  by 
which  he  may  be  distrained.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered 
that  he  should  distrain  him  by  his  lands,  etc.,  and  that  he  should 
have  his  body  [at  Westminster*]  on  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael, 
etc.     Maurice  puts  in  his  place  Adam  de  Vallibus. 

Memb,  Sd, 

1285.  Henry  de  Cem  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  John  de  Lambrok'  on  a  plea  that  he  should  warrant  to 
him  half  a  virgate  of  land  and  one  messuage,  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Lapse,'  w^hich  Sabina,  formerly  the  wife  of  Henry  del 
Ortyay,  claims  as  her  right  and  escheat  against  him  [de  Cem]. 
John  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment, 
let  there  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King  of  John's 
land  to  the  value,  etc.,  and  the  day,  etc.,  and  let  him  be  sum- 
moned that  he  be  at  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of  St 
Michael.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Sabina,  etc.,  and  Henry 
puts  in  his  place  Henry  de  Tampton.  Sabina  puts  in  her  place 
Richard  Coppe  or  Adam  de  Haselber*,  and  removes  Adam  de 
Lumen',  whom  before,  etc. 

1286.  Mabel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  Martin,  seeks 
against  Robert  Fromund  half  a  hide  of  land,  with  the  appurte- 
nances, in  Nethercote,  as  her  right  and  marriage  portion,  etc., 
and  in  which  the  said  Robert  has  no  entry  otherwise  than  by 
Alexander  dc  Luveny,  to  whom  the  aforesaid  Robert  Luveny, 
formerly  the  husband  of  Mabel,  demised  it,  whom  in  his  lifetime 
she,  etc.  Robert  comes  and  defends  her  right  and  such  entry, 
and  says  that  he  had  no  entry  in  that  land  by  the  said  Alexander, 
for  he  had  entry  in  the  same  by  the  said  Robert,  formerly  Mabel's 
husband,  and  Mabel  cannot  contradict  this.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Robert  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  Mabel  is  in 
mercy.     She  is  a  pauper. 

Memb,  \od, 

1286a.  Mabel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  Martin,  offered 
herself  on  the  fourth  day. 

^  '*\Vestin"  is  in  the  margin  only.      The  sheriflf  here  would  be  the  sheriff  of 
Surrey.     "  Surr."  also  in  the  maigin. 
'  Apse  in  Broadway. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  333 

1287.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  Gulafre, 
Thomas  Heose,  Richard  the  Serjeant,  Roger  son  of  Richard, 
Robert  Duriman,  Wilham  Fichet,  Jordan  Gulafre,  Robert  de 
Wotton',  Godfrey  the  serjeant,  Robert  Leylolt,  Peter  Grenne, 
William  Scot,  Henry  Bud,  Geoffry  son  of  Robert,  El'  Gay, 
Roger  de  Sutever,  Peter  Putte,  Robert  Putte,  Godfrey  de  Deverel, 
William  son  of  Richard,  Roger  son  of  Hugh,  Richard  Alfred, 
Robert  Pope,  Adam  Sorel,  Walter  his  son,  Robert  Wenth', 
Reginald  Gulafre,  David  Garnage,  Robert  de  Irlond',  Hugh 
Prat,  John  Gyode,  and  John  Biaude  unjustly,  etc.,  disseised 
Hugh  de  Vivon  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Wytton,  which 
appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  Dyandon,  since  the  first,  etc., 
and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  '  John  Gulafre  comes  and 
answers  for  himself  and  all  the  others,  except  Thomas  Hose, 
Roger  son  of  Richard,  and  Jordan  Gulafre,  for  whom  he  does  not 
come,  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain. 
The  jurors  say  that  John  and  the  others  did  disseise  Hugh  of 
the  said  common  unjustly,  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Hugh  should  recover  his  seisin  by  view  of  the 
jurors.  John  and  all  the  others  are  in  mercy  by  pledge  of 
Martin  de  Legh  and  Reginald  Hose.     Damages,  i  mark. 

Memb.  Ii. 

1288.  Margery  de  Flury  seeks  against  William  de  Grenne- 
vill  and  Joan  his  wife  ten  acres  of  land  and  one  mill,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Langeford,  which  she  claims  as  her  right  and 
marriage  portion  and  in  which  they  have  no  entry  otherwise 
than  by  John  Cumyn,  to  whom  William  dc  Budevill',  formerly 
Margery's  husband,  demised  them,  and  whom  in  his  lifetime 
she,  etc.  William  and  Joan  come  and  vouch  to  warranty  John 
Cumyn,  who  is  present,  and  warrants  them  and  defends  her 
right  and  such  entry,  and  says  that  he  has  no  entry  in  the  said 
land  and  mill  by  the  said  William,  for  he  has  entry  in  the  same 
by  Margery  herself,  and  John  offers  our  lord  the  King  i  mark  to 
have  an  inquest  The  jurors  say  that  one  Richard  de  Budevill, 
whose  right  and  inheritance  the  land  was,  committed  felony,  by 
reason  of  which  the  land  was  in  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King 
for  a  year  and  a  day.  And  afterwards  there  came  one  Adam  de 
Stawell,  to  whom  our  lord  the  King  gave  the  land,  and  he  gave 

^  Here  is  a  blank  space. 


334  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


it  to  Thomas  Flury,  Margery's  father,  so  that  he,  Thomas,  after- 
wards gave  the  same  land  to  the  said  William  de  Bodevill, 
husband  of  the  said  Margery  in  marriage  with  Margery,  and  they 
say  positively  that  the  said  John  had  entry  in  the  said  land  and 
mill  by  the  said  William  de  Bodevill,  Margery's  husband,  and 
not  by  Margery.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Margery  should 
recovered  her  seisin,  and  John  is  in  mercy.  And  let  him  make 
an  exchange  with  the  said  William  and  Joan  to  the  value,  etc. 

1289.  The  same  Emisius  de  Dunheved  confesses  that  he 
gave  and  granted  to  Geoffry  de  Dunheved  the  whole  of  his  land 
in  Hertiland  and  Uppekot'  and  3ar.  annually  in  Welles,  to  have 
and  to  hold  to  Geoffry  and  his  heirs  of  the  chief  lord  of  the  fee, 
etc.,  and  after  the  death  of  him,  Ernisius,  the  whole  of  the  residue 
of  the  land  of  Ernisius  in  Welles  should  revert  to  him,  Geoffry, 
and  his  heirs  for  ever. 

1290.  Robert  de  Edinton  confesses  that  he  owes  Ralph  de 
Carcviir  13  marks  on  a  fine  made  between  them,  of  which  he 
should  pay  him  on  the  octave  of  St.  Peter  ad  Vincula  in  the 
twenty-eighth  year  6  marks,  and  on  the  morrow  of  St  Michael 
next  following,  6  marks,  and  this  payment  is  to  be  made  at 
Glaston,  and  unless  he  do  this  he  grants  that  he  [Ralph]  may 
distrain,  etc. 

1 29 1.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Emericus  del 
Orchyard,  Philip  de  Wydicumbe,  and  Henry  de  Otryford 
unjustly,  etc.,  disseised  Humphrey  del  Orchard  of  his  free  tene- 
ment in  Orchyard  since  the  first,  etc,  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  they  disseised  him  of  the  whole  manor  of  Orchyard 
of  which  James  his  father  died  seised  as  of  fee,  and  he,  Humphrey, 
after  the  death  of  the  said  James  his  father,  remained  in  seisin 
thereof  for  one  day  and  a  half  as  his  son  and  heir  until  the  said 
Emericus  and  the  others  disseised  him.  Emericus  comes.  The 
others  have  not  come,  nor  were  they  attached,  because  they  were 
not  found.  Therefore  let  the  assize  be  taken  against  them  by 
default  Emericus  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made, 
because  in  truth  one  Robert  de  Neutor  at  one  time  impleaded 
James  del  Orchyard  his  brother  touching  the  said  manor  in  the 
court  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  that  James  essoined  himself  flfe 
inalo  lecti  against  him  [Robert]  in  the  same  court.  Afterwards 
they  were  agreed  in  the  same  court  before  the  justices  itinerant 
at  Canterbury,*  so  that  a  chirograph  was  made  between  them, 

^  See  *•  Somerset  Fines,"  p.  108,  No.  38. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  335 

which  he  proffers,  and  which  testifies  that  the  said  James  recog- 
nised the  said  manor,  with  its  appurtenances,  to  be  the  right  of 
Robert,  and  gave  it  up  to  him  in  the  same  court,  and  for  this, 
etc.,  the  same  Robert,  on  the  request  of  the  said  James,  gave  and 
granted  to  the  said  Emericus  del  Orchyard  the  said  manor,  with 
its  appurtenances,  to  have  and  to  hold,  to  the  same  Emericus 
and  the  heirs  of  his  body,  of  the  said  Robert  and  his  heirs  for 
ever,  rendering  therefor  yearly  one  pound  of  cummin  or  two  pence 
at  the  festival  of  St.  Michael,  and  performing  the  forinsec  service 
which  belonged  to  the  manor  for  all  services,  exactions,  etc. 
And  because  it  is  proved  by  the  fine  that  the  said  James  had 
nothing  in  the  said  manor  otherwise  than  by  the  permission  and 
grace  of  Emericus,  it  is  considered  that  Emericus  [may  go] 
without  a  day,  and  that  Humphrey  should  take  nothing  by  that 
assize,  but  should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.^ 


ROLL  No.  20I.     (Dorsetshire.) 

This  roll  contains  part  of  the  proceedings  upon  the  eyre,  of  which 
Roll  No.  200  is  also  a  record     It  dates  from  the  summer  of  1 244. 

Meinb.  i. 

Pleas  of  the  Crown  in  the  county  of  Dorset  at  Schyrebum,  before 
Roger  de  Thurkelby,  Gilbert  de  Preston,  and  their  com- 
panions, justices  itinerant,  in  the  twenty-eighth  year  of  the 
reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb.  8, 

1 292.  Amercements  in  the  county  of  Dorset  on  the  eyre  of 
R.  de  Thurkelby  : 

Robert  de  Pavilly  for  the  same*  \  mark. 

Memb.  id. 

John  Gulafre  for  disseisin  \  mark 

John  Cumyn  for  unjust  detention  i  mark 

^  This  is  followed  by  a  few  words,  partly,  and  no  doubt  intended  to  be  wholly, 
struck  out.  to  the  effect  that  he  should  hear  his  judgment  at  Westminster  on  the 
quindene  of  Michaelmas. 

*  For  <*  false  claim."     This  and  the  following  entries  haw  die 
"  Somerset  "  in  the  margin. 


336  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb,  9. 

William  Barat  of  Southampton,  his  fine  for  trans- 
gression. By  pledge  of  William  Reymund  of 
Southampton  and  Stephen  Joce  i  mark. 

Memb,  ()d. 

The  sheriff  for  the  chattels  of  Benedict  Morin  of 
Estdoneleg',  convicted  of  felony  i6j. 

Memb,  lod. 
The  township  of  Melebum  for  transgression  i  mark. 

Memb.  11. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi^  taken  at  Schyreburn*  on  the  morrow 
of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul. 

1293.  The  Prior  de  Monte  Acuto  against  the  Mayor  and 
Bailiffs  of  Exeter  on  a  plea  of  tolls  by  Richard  de  Worth.  On 
Saturday  next  after  the  festival  of  the  Apostles  Peter  and  Paul. 
He  has  pledged  his  faith .^ 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi^  taken  at  Schirebum'  on  the  octave 
of  St  John  Baptist. 

1294.  Roger  de  Walton  against  Baldwin  de  Wayford  on  a 
plea  of  debt  by  Michael  son  of  William.  On  the  quindene  of  St 
Michael  at  Westminster.     He  has  pledged  his  faith.^ 

1295.  Robert  Scerepe  against  Isolt,  formerly  the  wife  of 
Robert  de  Blokesworth,  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  Jordan  Kene.  On 
Sunday.     He  has  pledged  his  faith. 

1 296.  Richard  de  Blancmoster,  whom  Thomas  de  la  Ware 
vouched  to  warranty,  against  Mabel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert 
Martun,  on  a  plea  of  land,  by  Gervase  de  Aysseford.  A  day  is 
given  him  on  Monday,  and  Mabel  puts  in  her  place  Richard  de 
Cathanger. 


1  In  the  margin  "  z/^  ■/ ."  ^  Vci-  in  the  ir  argin. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  337 


ROLL  No.  699.    (Oxfordshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  the  summer  of  a.d.  1247. 

Memb.  i. 

Pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Oxford  on  the  morrow  of  the 
Ascension  of  our  Lord,  in  *  the  thirty-first  year  of  the  reign  of 
King  Henry,  son  of  King  John,  before  Roger  de  Thurkelby  and 
his  companions. 

Memb.  9. 

1297.  Drogo  de  Staunton  and  Ah'ce  his  wife  put  in  their 
place  Drogo  their  son,  or  Henry  de  Monteforti,  against  the 
parson  of  Staunton  and  the  Archdeacon  of  Bath  on  a  plea  of 
prohibition.* 

Memb.  19. 

1298.  Henry  de  Monteforti  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Master  William  de  Leucenay  on  a  plea  why  he  sued  in 
court  christian  a  plea  of  advowson  of  the  church  of  Nuny* 
which  belongs  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill  contrary,  etc. 
William  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  the  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he 
should  attach  him  to  be  here  to-day.  The  sheriff  certified  that 
[William]  had  no  lay  fee  by  which  he  might,  etc.  Therefore  the 
Bishop  of  Bath  is  ordered  that  he  should  cause  him  [William] 
to  come  to  Northampton  on  the  morrow  of  the  nativity  of  St^ 
John  Baptist,  etc.,  and  thereon  the  sheriff  has  certified,  etc. 


ROLL  No.  614.    (Northamptonshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  the  summer  of  a.d.  1247. 

Meinb.  I. 

Pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Northampton  on  the  morrow  of  the 
nativity  of  St.  John  Baptist,  in  the  thirty-first  year  of  the  reign  of 
King  Henry,  son  of  King  John,  before  Roger  de  Thurkelby  and 
his  companions. 

^  Sec  Nos.  rjcx),  1302,  1307,  131 5  and  1325.  ^  Nunncy. 

2   X 


338  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Alevib,  4. 

1299.  Henry  de  Monteforti  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Master  William  dc  Leuencenay  on  a  plea  why  he  sued 
in  court  christian  a  plea  of  advowson  of  the  church  of  Nuny 
which  belongs  to  his  [Henry's]  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill 
contrary,  etc.  William  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  the  Bishop  of 
Bath  was  notified  that  he  should  cause  him  to  be  here  to-day. 
The  Bishop  did  nothing,  but  he  has  certified  that  he  summoned 
him,  etc.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should 
summon  the  Bishop  that  he  be  [here]  in  one  month  after  the 
nativity  of  St.  John  Baptist,  and  let  him  have  here  the  said 
Master  William,  etc.,  and  let  the  Bishop  be  [here]  to  hear  his 
judgment,  etc.^ 

1300.  Drogo  de  Staunton  and  Alice  his  wife  offered  them- 
selves on  the  fourth  day  against  Master  Nicholas,  Archdeacon 
of  Bath,  on  a  plea  why  he  held  in  court  christian  a  plea  touching 
the  lay  fee  of  them,  Drogo  and  Alice,  in  Staunton*  contrary  to 
the  prohibition,  etc.  Nicholas  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  he  had 
this  day  by  his  essoin,  after  the  Bishop  of  Bath  was  notified  that 
he  should  cause  him  to  come  before  the  justices  itinerant  at 
Oxford  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity,  etc.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is 
ordered  that  he  should  summon  him  to  be  [here]  in  one  month 
after  the  nativity  of  St.  John  Baptist,  etc.,  and  let  him  have  here 
the  archdeacon,  etc.,  and  let  the  bishop  be  [here]  to  hear  his 
judgment.^ 

1 301.  Robert  Walleraund  puts  in  his  place  Nicholas  the 
chaplain  against  Roger,  Bishop  of  Bath,  on  a  plea  of  dower. 

Memb.  4d. 

1302.  Walter  the  parson  of  Staunton'  was  attached  to  answer 
Drogo  dc  Staunton'  and  Alice  his  wife  on  a  plea  why  he 
[Walter]  sued  in  court  christian  a  plea  touching  the  lay  fee  of 
them,  Drogo  and  Alice,  in  Staunton*  contrary  to  the  prohibi- 
tion, etc.,  and  whereon  Drogo  and  Alice,  by  their  attorney,  say 
that  when  he  [Walter]  held  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  Staunton'  of  the  fee  of  them,  Drogo  and  Alice,  by 
such  forinscc  service  as  should  belong  to  the  said  virgate  of  land 
for  all  services,  and  when  they  wished  to  make  distress  (/acere 

^  In  the  margin  is  the  note  *'  ♦"     See  Ncs.  1298  and  1308. 
*  Ste  Nus.  1307,  1 315  and  1325. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  339 

districionevi)  for  the  scutage  of  Gannok,*  demanding  from  the 
same  Walter  \2d,  in  the  name  of  scutage  for  the  said  land  when 
the  scutage  was  at  4cxr.,  and  for  more,  more,  and  for  less,  less. 
Walter  on  the  occasion  of  the  distress  cited  them  before  the  official 
of  the  Archdeacon  of  Bath  at  Bristoll'  in  the  church  of  St.  Mary  oi 
la  Radeclive ;  and  when  they  brought  to  Walter  the  prohibition 
of  our  lord  the  King  that  he,  Walter,  should  not  further  prosecute 
that  plea,  the  same  Walter,  in  contempt  of  the  prohibition  of  our 
lord  the  King,  prosecuted  the  plea  in  court  christian  before  the 
Archdeacon  of  Bath  from  day  to  day,  and  caused  them  and  all 
their  men  to  be  excommunicated.  Wherefore  they  say  that  they 
are  injured  and  have  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of  £^\ 
and  thereof  they  produce  suit,  etc  Walter  comes  and  defends 
the  force  and  injury,  etc.,  and  fully  admits  that  Drogo  and 
Alice  did  bring  to  him  the  said  prohibition,  on  Saturday  in  the 
week  of  Easter  last  past  about  the  hour  of  prime,  but  he 
positively  defends  against  them  and  their  suit  that  he  ever  after 
prosecuted  any  pica  in  court  christian  against  Drogo  and  Alice 
on  the  occasion  of  the  distress  for  the  said  scutage,  and  that  he 
ever  after  the  said  occasion  caused  them  to  be  excommunicated. 
This  he  is  ready  to  defend  against  them  and  their  suit  as  the 
court  shall  consider.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  he  should 
wage  his  law  to  the  twelfth  hand,*  and  come  with  his  law  in 
one  month  after  the  day  of  the  nativity  of  St.  John  Baptist. 
[Walter's]  pledges  for  the  law,  Jordan  de  Budiford'  and  Richard 
de  Clendon* ;  and  Walter  is  ordered  that  in  the  meantime  he 
should  cause  Drogo  and  Alice  and  their  men,  who  on  the  occa- 
sion aforesaid  were  excommunicated,  to  be  absolved,  and  that  to 
do  this  he  should  find  the  aforesaid  pledges  who  have  mainprised 
this.  Moreover,  Master  John  de  Stantona,  son  of  the  said 
Walter,  has  also  mainprised  this,  and  bound  for  this  a  certain 
wardship  {custodiavi)  which  he  has  in  the  county  of  Somerset. 
Afterwards,  on  the  said  day  Walter  came,  and  was  not  able 
to  deny  that  on  the  occasion  of  the  distress  which  Drogo  and 
Alice  made  for  the  said  scutage  he  excommunicated  them  and 
denounced  the  excommunicated.  Afterwards,  by  order  of  the 
justices  he  proclaimed  them  to  be  absolved  from  that  sentence, 
and  thereupon   executed  his   letters  patent   which    Henry  de 

*  In  1246,  of  3  marks  on  the  fee,  for  the  Welsh  War  :  Stubbs,  *•  G)nst.  Hist.," 
ch.  14. 

*  Sec  note  to  No.  572. 


340  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS 


M>ate  forti,  the  attorney'  of  the  said  Drogo  aod  Alice,  prodfers 
and  which  testify*  this.  Afterwards  they  are  agreed,  and  Walter 
gives  40J.  for  a  licence  to  agree  by  pledge  of  William  de  Bosco 
and  Peter  de  Asrugg'.  The  agreement  is  that  Walter  should 
pay  them  the  said  scutage,  and  he  freely  grants  that  in  future  he 
will  pay  scutage  when  it  shall  happen,  to  wit,  I2d^  of  a  scutage 
of  40s^  more  or  less,  and  Walter  owes  Drogo  and  Alice  405:  for 
their  damages,  of  which  he  will  pay  them  half  at  the  festival  of 
St.  Michael  in  the  thirt\'-first  \'ear  and  the  other  half  at  the 
nativity  of  our  Ijord  next  folloi^-ing ;  and  if  he  do  not  this,  he 
grants  that  the  sheriff  may  cause  of  his  lands,  etc^ 

Jftmi.  8. 

I  303.  Robert  Walleraund  and  Denise  his  wife,  by  their 
attome>%  seek  against  Roger,  Bishop  of  Bath,  the  manor  of 
Axebrigge.  with  the  appurtenances,  whereof  Thomas  le  Walcis, 
formerlv  Denise's  husband,  endowed  her  bv  name  when  he 
married  her,  etc  The  Bishop,  by  his  attorneys,  comes,  and 
vouches  to  \*'arrant\''  Andrew**  Luterel  and  Robert  de  Gumav,  the 
heir  of  Maurice  de  Gaunt  Let  them*  have  them  in  one  month 
after  St  John  Baptist  s  day  by  help  of  the  court  Let  Andrew 
be  summoned  in  the  county  of  Nottingham  and  Robert  in  the 
county  of  Somerset 

Memb.  1 2d. 

1304-  Christina,  formerly  the  wife  of  Nicholas  Attebere, 
offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Master  Walter  de 
Sancto  Quintino,  Archdeacon  of  Taunton',  on  a  plea  of  one- 
third  part  of  twenty-seven  acres  of  land,  one  acre  of  meadow, 
one  acre  of  wood,  and  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances  in 
Welleford',  which  third  parts  she  claims  in  dower  against  him, 
etc.  Master  Walter  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  he  was  summoned, 
etc.  Judgment,  let  the  said  third  part  be  taken  into  the  hand 
of  our  lord  the  King,  and  the  day,  etc,  and  let  him  be  sum- 
moned that  he  be  at  Bedford  on  the  quindene  of  St  Michael, 
etc. 

'  See  Nos.  1297,  1300  and  I'^SS-  The  case  against  the  archdeacon  for  his  share 
in  the  matter  has  yet  to  be  heard  :  see  Nos.  1307,  1315,  and  1325. 

'  The  plural  number  is  used,  by  ref<:rence,  do  doubt,  to  the  attorneys  of  the 
Bishop. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  34 1 


Memb.  23. 

1305.  Margery  de  Florie  seeks  against  William  de  Lange- 
ford*  and  Matilda  his  wife  eight  acres  of  land  and  one-third  part 
of  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances  in  Langeford',  as  her 
right  and  marriage  portion  and  in  which  they  have  no  entry 
otherwise  than  by  William  de  Langeford',  to  whom  William  de 
Bradeviir,  formerly  Margery's  husband,,  demised  them,  whom  in 
his  lifetime  she  could  not  contradict.  William  and  Matilda 
come  and  seek  a  view.  Let  them  have  it.  A  day  is  given  them 
at  Bedford  in  three  weeks  after  St.  Michael's  day,  and  in  the 
meantime,  etc.  And  Matilda  puts  in  her  place  William  her 
husband,  etc. 

1 306.  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba,  by 
her  attorney,  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  C[ecily] 
.  .  .  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  seventeen  acres  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances  in  Hunespull',^  which  she  claims  in  dower 
.     .     .     Cecily  did  not  come,  and  she  made  other  default  before 

the  justices  at  Westminster,  to  wit,  on so  that  the 

sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  take  the  said  third  part  into 
the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  the  sheriff  notified  the  day 
of  taking,  and  that  she  was  summoned.  Therefore  it  is  con- 
sidered that  Muriel  should  recover  her  seisin  against  her  by 
default,  and  Cecily  is  in  mercy  for  unjust  detention. 

Memb,  25. 

1307.  Master  Nicholas,  Archdeacon  of  Bath,  was  attached  to 
answer  Drogo  de  Staunton*  and  Alice  his  wife  on  a  plea  why  he 
held  in  court  christian  a  plea  touching  the  lay  fee  of  them, 
Drogo  and  Alice,  in  Staunton'  contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc., 
and  whereon  Drogo  and  Alice,  by  their  attorney,  say  that  when 
they  produced  the  prohibition  of  our  lord  the  King  in  the  church 
.  .  .  .  on  Saturday  in  Easter  week  last  past  against  the 
holding  by  the  Archdeacon  of  the  said  plea  in  court  christian 
touching  the  lay  fee  of  them,  Drogo  and  Alice,  because  they 
had  made  a  distress  for  scutate  owing  to  them  in  respect  of  one 
virgate  of  land  .  .  .  which  Walter,  parson  of  Stanton',  held 
of  the  fee  of  Drogo  and  Alice  in  Staunton',  by  taking  the  cattle 
of  him,   Walter,  for  the  said  scutage,  the  Archdeacon  by  his 

>  Huntspill. 


342  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


official  on  the  same  day,  after  he  had  received  the  prohibition, 
forthwith  renewed  the  sentence  .  .  .  promulgated  by  order 
of  the  Archdeacon  against  Drogo  and  Alice  and  their  men  and 
denounced  them  as  excommunicate  in  the  whole  of  the  arch- 
deaconry ;  wherefore  they  say  that  they  are  injured,  and  have 
suffered  damage  to  the  value  of  lo  marks,  and  thereof  they 
produce  suit.  The  Archdeacon  comes  and  defends  the  force 
and  injur}",  etc.,  and  positively  defends  against  him  [Drogo]  and 
his  suit  that  he,  after  the  receipt  of  the  prohibition,  ever  held  in 
court  christian  any  plea  touching  the  lay  fee  of  Drogo  and 
Alice  in  Staunton',  nor  after  the  prohibition,  on  the  occasion  of 
any  distress  made  for  the  said  scutage,  has  he  excommunicated 
them  or  renewed  the  sentence  promulgated  against  them,  and 
this  he  is  ready  to  defend  against  him  and  his  suit  as  the  court 
shall  consider.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  he  should  wage 
his  law  to  the  twelfth  hand,  and  come  with  his  law  to  Bedford 
on  the  octave  of  St.  Michael.  Pledges  for  the  law,  Stephen  de 
Lund*  and  Robert  de  Westminster,  and  the  Archdeacon  is  pro- 
hibited in  the  meanwhile  from  vexing  them  for  that  cause. 

Memb.  29. 

1308.  Henry  de  Monte  forti  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Roger,  Bishop  of  Bath,  on  a  plea  that  he  [the 
Bishop]  should  be  here  to-day  and  have  Master  William  de 
Leucenay  to  the  said  Henry  on  a  plea  why  he  prosecuted  in 
court  christian  a  plea  touching  the  advowson  of  the  church  of 
Nuny  which  belongs  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill, 
contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc.  The  Bishop  did  not  come, 
etc.,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment,  let  him  be  attached 
that  he  be  at  Bedford  on  the  octave  of  St.  Michael,  because 
another  day,  etc  And  because  it  is  testified  that  the  said 
Master  William  dwells  within  the  diocese  of  Worcester,  the 
same  Bishop^  is  notified  that  he  should  cause  him  to  come  at 
the  same  time.     And  the  sheriff  of  Somerset  is  notified,  etc. 

Memb,  34^. 

Essoins   de  malo   veniendi   on  the  quindene  of   the  Apostles 
Peter  and  Paul. 

*  **  Eidem  Episcopo^' :  the  Bishop  of  Worcester  is  meant.     There  is  **  Wigom^ " 
in  the  margin. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  343 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  in  three  weeks  after  the  nativity 
of  SL  John  Baptist. 

1309.  William  de  Bere,  the  attorney  of  John  le  Daneys  and 
Rose  his  wife,  of  Master  Roger  de  Marisco,  Thomas  de  Lange- 
londe,  Thomas  le  Riche,  Robert  son  of  Matilda,  John  Eglawy, 
John  Rusell  and  Margery  his  wife,  of  William  de  Gaunt  and 
Emeline  his  wife,  against  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de 
Sancta  Barba,  on  a  plea  of  dower  by  William  son  of  Simon. 
William  de  Horsey,  the  other  attorney,  against  the  same  upon 
the  same  by  Richard  de  Aire.  On  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael 
at  Bedford.  They  have  pledged  their  faith.  The  same  day  is 
given  to  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba,  whom  the  said  Thomas  and 
the  others  vouched  to  warranty,  etc.,  in  banco}  Let  Robert  son 
of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba,  the  warrantor,  be  required  to  present 
himself  {exigatur)? 

Metnh,  35. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  one  month  after  the  day  of  the 
nativity  of  St  John  Baptist. 

1 3 10.  Robert  de  Gurnay,  whom  the  Bishop  of  Bath  vouched 
to  warranty  against  Robert  Walcraund  and  Denise  his  wife 
on  a  plea  of  land  by  Walter  le  Moser.  In  one  month  from  St. 
Michael's  day  at  Neuport  Paynel.     He  has  pledged  his  faith. 

131 1.  Andrew  Luterel  against  the  same  by  Henry  Sprot 
He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to  the  Bishop 
of  Bath  by  his  attorney  in  banco. 


ROLL    No.  4.    (Bedfordshire.) 

This  is  a  roll  of  35  membranes  of  the  Bedfordshire  eyre  of  Roger  de 
Thurkelby  in  1247.  The  membranes  appear  to  be  somewhat  out  of 
regular  sequence.  The  Somerset  entries  amongst  the  forinsec  pleas 
have  been  extracted.  Memb.  21  has  no  title.  Memb.  20  contains 
pleas  taken  at  Dunstable,  which  are  concluded  on  memb.  lod. 
Memb.  21  seems  to  be  out  of  place.  Membs.  22,  23,  and  24  are  also 
devoted  to  forinsec  pleas,  etc.  Memb.  25  takes  up  again  the  local 
business  of  the  eyre. 

'  The  margin  has  the  note  *^  post  vis*  de  [vh*  et  Roes\'*  =  after  view  by  John  and 
Rose ;  also  *'  t/^y-  de  a/tt's." 

'  This  last  sentence  seems  to  be  a  postscript 


344  SOMERSETSIITRE   PLEAS. 

Memb.  i. 

1 31 2.  Richard,  Bishop  of  Wells,  against  Michael,  Abbot  of 
Glastingbir,  on  a  plea  of  advowson  and  on  a  plea  of  land  by 
John  the  Nuncio.  John,  Dean  of  Wells,  and  the  chapter  of  the 
same  place  against  the  same  by  Walter  de  Well*.  (This  entry 
is  struck  out.) 

1313.  Alexander  le  Combe  against  Constance,  formerly  the 
wife  of  William  de  Lokesworth',  on  a  plea  of  dower,  by  John 
de  Cem*.  On  the  quindene  of  St  Michael,  for  dower.  He 
has  pledged  his  faith.  Constance  puts  in  her  place  Richard  her 
son.^ 

Menib.  \d. 
Essoins  de  male  veniendi  taken  at  the  same  time.* 

1 3 14.  Henry  de  Monte  Forti,  the  attorney  of  Drogo  de 
Staunton  and  Alice  his  wife,  against  Master  Nicholas  Teshun, 
Archdeacon  of  Bath,  on  a  plea  of  wager  of  law  by  William  de 
Warr*.  Richard  de  Staunton,  the  other  attorney,  against  the 
same  in  respect  of  the  same  by  William  Marcscall*.  On  the 
morrow  of  All  Souls  at  Neuport  Painel. 

Memb.  2. 

Essoins  de  male    veniendi^   etc.,   taken  on   the   octave  of    St 
Michael. 

1 31 5.  Master  Nicholas  Tessun,  Archdeacon  of  Bath,  against 
Drogo  de  Stanton*  and  Alice  his  wife  concerning  wager  of  law, 
by  Adam  le  Norreys. 

Memb.  2d. 
On  the  quindene  of  St  Michael. 

1 3 16.  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba,  whom  Roger  de  Marisco, 
Thomas  de  Langeland,  Thomas  le  Riche,  Robert  son  of 
Matilda,  John  Egglehof,  John  Russel  and  Margery  his  wife, 
William  le  Gaunt  and  Emelina  his  wife,  vouched  to  warranty 
against  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba 
on  a  plea  of  dower,  by  Robert  de  Cuntevill'.     On  the  octave 

^  In  the  margin  **  w  -f-  "  =  non  est.     See  Nos.  1321  and  1329,  same  case. 
^  This  appears  from  a  previous  heading  on  the  iame  mcmb.  to  be  on  the  octave 
of  Michaehnias. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS  345 


of  St.  Martin,  at  Wycumb*.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.^ 
The  same  day  is  given  to  the  aforesaid  Roger  and  all  the 
others,  except  William  le  Gant  and  Emelina  his  wife,  by  their 
attorney  in  banco  ;  and  William  and  Emelina  did  not  come,  as 
appears  in  the  plea.'  Roger  and  the  others  put  in  their  place 
the  before-named  de  Langeland.^ 

Metnb,  4a. 

Pleas  and  assizes  in  the  county  of  Bedford,  on  the  morrow  of 
St.  Michael,  in  the  thirty-first  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
Henry,  son  of  King  John,  before  R.  de  Thurkileby  and 
his  companions. 

Mentb.  11. 

1 3 17.  William  de  Greynvill'  puts  in  his  place  Reginald  le 
Irreys  against  Master  Henry  le  Petit  and  others  named  in  the 
writ  of  prohibition,  etc.* 

Mevib,  21. 

1 318.  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba, 
by  her  attorney,  seeks  against  John  le  Deneys  and  Roesia  his 
wife  one-third  part  of  sixty  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Hunspiir  as  her  dower,  etc.  John  and  Roesia,  by  their 
attorney,  come  and  vouch  to  warranty  Robert  son  of  Robert 
de  Sancta  Barba.  Let  them  have  him  on  the  octave  of  St. 
Martin  at  Wicumbe  by  aid  of  the  court 

1 3 19.  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba, 
offers  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  William  le  Gaunt  and 
Emelina  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  one  messuage 
and  nine  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Est  Brente, 
which  she  claims  in  dower  against  them.  William  and  Emelina 
do  not  come,  and  they  were  summoned,  etc.  Judgment,  let  the 
said  third  part  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King.' 
And  a  day,  etc.,  and  they  are  summoned  to  be  at  Wicumb'  on 
the  octave  of  St.  Martin. 


^  In  the  margin  is  the  note  **  ve-^,^ 

'  See  No.  131 9. 

^  See  further  as  to  these  cases  in  the  next  following  roll. 

*  The  margin  has  "  Exon  *'  as  well  as  **  Snifts.'* 

^  Because  of  William  and  Emelina^  default  in  a^>pearing.     See  No.  1332. 

2    Y 


346  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Memb.  2  id. 

1320.  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  le  Taylur,  offers 
herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Walter  Russel  on  a  plea  of 
one-third  part  of  sixteen  acres  of  land  and  one  messuage,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Bernardeswrth',  which  she  claims  against 
them  as  her  dower.  Walter  does  not  come,  and  he  was  sum- 
moned, etc.  Judgment,  let  the  said  third  part  be  taken  into 
the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King.  And  a  day,  etc.  And  he  is 
summoned  to  be  at  Wicumb'  on  the  octave  of  St.  Martin. 

Mcmb.  22d. 

1 32 1.  Constance,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  de  Lekes- 
wurth',  seeks  against  Alexander  le  Camber'  one  messuage,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Brug  Walteri^  as  her  dower,  etc.,  and 
whereof  by  name,  etc'  Alexander  comes  and  demands  a 
view.  Let  him  have  it.  A  day  is  given  them  on  the  octave 
of  St.  Martin,  and  in  the  meantime  [let  the  view  be  had]. 

Memb,  23^/. 

1322.  Christiana,  formerly  the  wife  of  Nicholas  Atteber', 
seeks  against  Master  Walter  de  Sancto  Quintino  one-third  part 
of  twenty-seven  [acres  of  land],  of  one  acre  of  meadow,  of  one 
acre  of  wood,  and  of  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Welleford'  as  her  dower,  etc.  with  which  the  said  Nicholas, 
formerly  her  husband,  endowed  her,  etc.  Master  Walter  comes 
and  says  that  she  ought  not  to  have  dower  therein  because,  he 
says,  Nicholas  never  held  the  said  land,  meadow,  wood,  and 
house  in  his  demesne  so  as  to  be  able  to  endow  her  thereout. 
He  says  that  the  land,  meadow,  wood,  and  house  are  the  right 
of  his  church  of  Wyncrton,  and  that  Nicholas  did  not  hold  those 
tenements  otherwise  than  by  the  demise  of  a  certain  vicar  of  his  of 
his  church,  Michael  by  name,  and  that  he  [Nicholas]  held  them 
at  the  will  of  the  vicar.  Christiana  says  that  Nicholas  held  the 
tenements  in  fee,  and  that  he  endowed  her  thereout,  etc.,  and  on 
this  she  puts  herself  upon  the  country.  Master  Walter  does 
likewise.     The  sheriff  is  therefore  ordered  that  he  should  cause 

*  Bridgwater.     In  the  margin  against  this  entry  we  have  again  *'  +  " 
^  Meaning  that  her  husband  had  endowed  her  of  this  particular  property.     See 
Bract.,  fo.  299b. 


SOxMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  347 


to  come  before  him  twelve,  etc.,  and  who  now,  etc.,  and  by  their, 
etc.,  to  recognise,  etc.,  whether  the  aforesaid  Nicholas,  formerly 
her  husband,  held  the  land,  meadow,  wood,  and  house  in  fee  so 
that  he  was  able  to  endow  her  thereout  as  Christiana  says,  or 
whether  he  did  not  hold  them  at  the  will  of  the  said  Michael 
his  vicar,  as  Master  Walter  says  ;  and  that  he  should  make 
known  [the  finding  of]  the  inquest  at  Wycumbc  on  the  octave 
of    St.  Martin  in  writing  [J>er   litteras^  etc.)  and  by  two,  etc. 

[knights]  because,  etc.,^ And  Master  Walter  puts  in    his 

place  Peter  the  Dean  or  William  Russell.  On  that  day  the 
[finding  of  the]  inquest  came,  which  is  that  Nicholas  never  held 
the  said  land,  wood,  and  meadow'  othenvise  than  at  the  will  and 
by  the  demise  of  the  said  Michael,  the  vicar.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  the  Master  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  that 
Christiana  should  take  nothing  by  that  writ,  but  should  be  in 
mercy  for  her  false  claim.     She  is  a  pauper. 

Memb,  24. 

1323.  Master  Henry  of  Bath  was  attached  to  answer  William 
de  Greynviir  on  a  plea  why  he  sued  in  court  christian  touching 
chattels  which  are  not  testamentary  or  matrimonial  {que  non 
sunt  de  testamento  vel  matrimonio)^  contrary  to  the  prohibition  of 
our  lord  the  King,  and  wherein  William  says  that  Master  Henry 
impleaded  him  in  court  christian  before  the  Archdeacon  of 
Gloucester  in  the  church  of  the  Blessed  Mary  in  Oxford,  and 
sought  from  him  8  marks,  which  were  not  testamentary,  etc.,  and 
that  when  he  produced  the  prohibition  of  our  lord  the  King  on 
the  morrow  of  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary  this  year  in 
the  said  church  against  the  prosecution  of  the  said  plea,  the  same 
Master  Henry  nevertheless  prosecuted  the  said  plea,  contrary  to 
the  prohibition,  wherefore  he  says  that  he  was  injured,  and 
incurred  damage  to  the  value,  etc.  Master  Henry  comes  and 
defends  the  force  and  injury,  etc.,  and  says  that  he  has  not 
impleaded  him  in  court  christian  of  any  lay  chattels  {de  aliquibus 
laycis  catallis)  against  the  prohibition  of  our  lord  the  King,  and 
he  fully  defends  against  him  and  his  [William's]  sole  voice  {solam 

^  Meaning  that  the  parties  have  put  themselves  upon  such  a  jury.  See  as  to 
these  inquests,  Bract.,  fo.  397-397 b. 

^  Nothing  is  said  of  the  house,  but  this  was  probably  an  omission  by  the  clerk 
who  made  the  entry  on  the  roll. 


348  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

vocem  suatn).  And  because  he^  produces  no  suit  beyond  his 
simple  statement,  it  is  considered  that  Henry  [may  go]  with- 
out a  day.  and  William  is  in  mercy  by  pledge  of  William  de 
Cobbeham. 

Memb,  25. 

1324.  William  de  Langeford  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Margery  Flury  on  a  plea  of  eight  acres  of  land  and 
of  one-third  part  of  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Langeford,  which  she  claims  against  him  as  her  right  and 
marriage  portion.  Margery  does  not  come,  and  she  was  claimant 
{et  fuit  petens).  Therefore  William  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and 
Margery  is  in  mercy.     She  has  not  found  pledges,  etc* 

Memb.  25^. 

1325.  William  de  Warr\  essoiner  of  Henry  de  Monte  Forti, 
the  attorney  of  Drogo  de  Staunton  and  Alice  his  wife,  offers 
himself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Nicholas  Thesun,  Archdeacon 
of  Bath,  on  a  plea  of  wager  of  law  against  Drogo  and  Alice 
concerning  their  lay  fee  contrary,  etc.,  and  Nicholas  does  not 
come,  etc.  He  had  a  day  in  banco  to  this  day,  after  which  he 
waged  his  law  (post  quam  vadiavit  legem  suam),  and  he  found 
these  pledges,  to  wit,  Robert  de  Weston*  and  Stephen  de  Lund 
to  make  his  law  {ad  faciendam  legem  suam).  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Nicholas  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in 
mercy.  Let  him  satisfy  Drogo  and  Alice  their  damages,  which 
are  taxed  {que  taxantur)  at  .*  The  Sheriff  is  ordered 
that  of  [the  Archdeacon's]  lands  and  chattels,  dic.^fi.fac,,  etc 


ROLL  Na  56.    (Buckinghamshire.) 

This  is  the  roll  of  the  eyre  of  31-32  Henry  III.  (1247),  before  Roger 
de  Thurkelby.     The  roll  comprises  47  membranes. 

^  The  entry  b  careless  here.  Judging  by  the  result,  **  he  "  must  refer  to  William. 
There  is  no  statement  earlier  in  the  plea  that  William  produced  suit  in  support  of  his 
statement  as  he  ought  to  have  done,  and  therefore  Henry  did  not  deem  it  necessary  to 
meet  it  by  suit  on  his  side.  There  is  a  marginal  note  that  William  is  to  be  in  custody. 
No  doubt  his  pledge  came  later  and  was  accepted. 

'  Pledges  to  prosecute  that  is,  beyond  her  own  **  fiuth  "  or  undertaking. 

'  Blank  in  original. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  349 


Memb,  i. 

Essoins  de  male  veniendi  taken  at  Neuport  Paynel  on  Wednesday 
next  after  the  festival  of  St  Luke. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Neuport  Paynel  in  one  month 
after  Michaelmas.  (This  is  lower  down  on  the  same  mem- 
brane.) 

1326.  Henry  de  Erie  against  Henry  de  Gaunt  on  a  plea  of 
covenant  by  Osbert  de  Bruera. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Neuport  Paynell  in  one  month 
from  St.  Michael's  day. 

1327.  Jollanus  de  Cureford,  attorney  of  R.  Bishop  of  Bath, 
against  Robert  Walraund  and  Denise  his  wife  on  a  plea  of 
dower,  by  John  le  Messager.  On  the  quindene  of  St  Martin  at 
Wicumbe,  by  pledge  of  Stephen    .... 

1328.  William  de  Bonevill',  the  other  attorney,  against  the 
same  upon  the  same,  by  John  le  Leu  by  the  same  pledge.  The 
same  day  is  given  to  Robert  de  Gurnay,  whom  the  Bishop 
vouches  to  warranty,  by  his  attorney  in  banco.  And  be  it  known 
that  Ma  .  .  .  s  [Matthew?]  the  Norman  is  the  attorney  of  Robert 
de  Gurnay  by  writ  of  our  lord  the  King.  [The  same  day  is  given 
to  the  said  Andrew  in  banco}    (This  much  is  a  postscript).] 

Memb.  2. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Neuport  Paynel  on  the  morrow 
of  St.  Martin. 

Memb.  3. 

1329.  Alexander  de  Comber  against  Custancia,  formerly  the 
wife  of  William  de  Lekewrth',  on  a  plea  of  dower,  by  Walter  de 
Howys.  On  the  quindene  of  Easter  at  Gloucester.  He  has 
pledged  his  faith.' 

1330.  Robert  de  Wyttlakeford',  attorney  of  Robert  Wale- 
raund'  and  Denise  his  wife,  against  the   Bishop  of  Bath  on  a 

*  In  the  margin  is  a  note  which  reads  thus:— *'cx''  Rob  de  G'nay  waif  f  Ar.tf 
Luterell."  I  think  the  explanation  is  this  :  Kotjert's  name  was  first  written  as  wai- 
rantor  ;  then  it  was  found  that  Andrew  was  in  a  similar  position  (see  memb.  3),  so 
his  name  was  added  and  a  caret  mark  put  after  Gurnay.  The  *'  ex' ''  appears  against 
many  entries  :  it  stands  for  exigantur  or  exigatur  I  think. 

*  In  the  margin  *^ post  visutn."     See  Nos.  1 313  and  1358. 
'  Over  Robert  Walerund's  name  is  written  pef  =  petens. 


350  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


plea  of  dower,  by  William  de  Napton*.  In  three  weeks  after 
Hilary  at  Lychef .  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is 
given  to  Andrew  Luterel,  whom  the  Bishop  vouched  to  warranty 
against  the  said  Robert  and  Denise  in  banco,  and  then  will  be 
allowed  {tunc  allocabitur)  to  the  Bishop  the  default  which  Robert 
de  Gumay,  the  co-party  {particeps)  of  Andrew,  made,  etc  And 
Andrew  puts  in  his  place  Robert  de  Cusingham. 

Memb,  ^d. 

1331.  Matthew  le  Franceys  against  the  Bishop  of  Bath  on 
a  plea  of  warranty,  by  Walter  le 

Memb.  5. 

Pleas  and  assizes  in  the  county  of  Buckingham  on  Wednesday 
next  before  the  feast  of  the  Apostles  Simon  and  Jude'  at 
Neuport  Painel,  before  R.  de  Thurkelby  and  his  companions, 
in  the  thirty-first  and  beginning  of  the  thirty-second  year 
of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Mevib.  2C. 
Pleas  of  divers  counties  at  Neuport  Paynel. 

Memb,  32. 

1332.  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba, 
by  her  attorney,  offers  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  William 
le  Gaunt  and  Emelina  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  one 
messuage  and  nine  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Estbrente,  which  she  claims  in  dower  against  them.  They  do 
not  come,  and  they  have  made  default  otherwise,  to  wit,  on  the 
quindene  of  St.  Michael  at  Bedford,  so  that  the  sheriff  was 
ordered  that  he  should  take  the  said  one-third  part  into  the 
hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  that  the  day,  etc.  And  the 
sheriff  notified  the  day  of  taking.  And  they  were  summoned 
etc.*  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Muriel  should  recover  her 
seisin  by  default,  and  William  is  in  mercy. 

*  The  day  of  the  Saints  was  the  28th  October,  the  first  day  of  the  King's  regnal 

year. 

*  The  process  to  enforce  attendance  was,  roughly  speaking,  this  :  Tf  the  defendant 
failed  to  attend  after  three  summonses  or  to  essoin  himself,  the  land  might  be  taken 
into  the  King's  hand.      If  then  the  defendant  did  not  appear  and  replevy  the  land 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  35 1 


1333.  The  same  Muriel,  by  her  attorney,  seeks  against 
Thomas  de  Langelond  one-third  part  of  twenty  acres,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Subrente,  and  against  Thomas  le  Rich  one-third 
part  of  one  messuage  and  thirteen  acres  of  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Robert  son  of  Matilda 
one-third  part  of  one  messuage  and  eight  acres  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill,  and  against  Master  Roger  the 
official  one-third  part  of  sixteen  acres  of  meadow,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  the  same  vill,  and  against  John  Eglof  one-third  part 
of  one  messuage  and  eight  acres  of  land  and  one  acre  of  meadow, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill,  and  against  John  Russell 
and  Margery  his  wife  one-third  part  of  one  messuage  and  twenty 
acres,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Estbrente,  and  against  William 
le  Gaunt  and  Emelina  his  wife  one-third  part  of  one  messuage 
and  nine  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill  as 
her  dower,  etc.  Thomas  and  all  the  others  come  and  vouch  to 
warranty  Robert  son  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba,  who  comes  by 
summons  and  warrants  them,  and  by  licence  yields  to  her  the 
said  third  parts  as  her  dower.  Therefore  let  the  said  Thomas 
and  the  others  hold  in  peace,  and  let  Muriel  have  of  the  land  of 
Robert  to  the  value,  etc. 

Mevib,  I2d, 

1 334.  Muriel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  de  Sancta  Barba,  by 
her  attorney,  offers  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Robert  de 
Cuntcviir  and  Nicholas  de  Cuntevill'  on  a  plea  that  they  should 
restore  to  her  chattels  to  the  value  of  ;f  10  which  they  owe  her, 
etc.  They  do  not  come,  etc.,  and  they  were  summoned,  etc. 
Judgment:  let  them  be  attached  that  they  be  at  Lichefeld  in  one 
month  after  Hilary,  etc. 

Memb,  34. 

1335.  Drogo  de  Staunton  and  Alice  his  wife,  by  their  attorney, 
offer  themselves  on  the  fourth  day  against  Walter,  the  parson  of 

within  fifteen  days,  the  suit  proceeded  in  default.  The  writ  to  the  sheriff  was 
the  great  or  the  little  cape.  The  former  applied  when  a  person  made  de&ult 
before  apj^earance  in  court  or  appointment  of  an  attorney  ;  the  Latter  for  default  after 
appearance.  This  is,  however,  only  a  very  general  statement,  for  this  method  of 
procedure  was  overlaid  with  much  learning  and  technicality.  The  forms  of  the  two 
writs  are  given  in  Braclon,  fos.  365  and  371b.  These  forms  differ  in  that,  in  the 
latter  case  the  sheriff  is  not  ordered  to  certify  the  day  of  caption  to  the  justices,  but 
the  omission  may  not  be  intentional.  In  the  cisc  before  us  the  great  cape  would 
&eem  to  have  been  used.     No.  1369  is  a  cai>e  of  replevin  after  such  proce&s. 


352  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Staunton,  on  a  plea  that  he  should  pay  them  {quod  redderet  eis) 
20S.  in  respect  of  a  fine  between  them  levied  before  the  justices 
at  NorhtV  and  which  he  ought  to  have  paid  to  them  on  the  festival 
of  St.  Michael  in  the  thirty-first  year,  and  has  not  yet  paid,  etc. 
The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  levy  the  said  money  on 
the  lands  and  chattels  of  the  said  Walter,  and  that  he  should 
have  it  this  day  to  pay,  etc.  and  the  sheriff  has  certified  that 
Walter  is  a  clerk,  and  has  nothing  in  his  [the  sheriffs]  county 
upon  which  he  could  levy  for  the  money.  Therefore  the  Bishop 
of  Wells  is  ordered  that  he  should  have  the  said  Walter  at 
Lichefeld  in  one  month  after  Hilary  to  pay,  etc. 


ROLL  No.  8 1.    (Cambridgeshire.) 

This  roll  would  seem  to  be  the  part  of  the  record  of  the  Cambridge 
proceedings  relating  to  matters  from  other  counties.  It  is  wholly 
devoted  to  forinsec  pleas  and  essoins.  On  memb.  i  there  [are  some 
entries  of  essoins  to  which,  contrary'  to  the  usual  practice,  no  county 
name  is  prefixed.  They  have  not  been  extracted,  although  from  the 
names  of  the  parties  in  some  an  inference  might  be  drawn  that  these 
particular  matters  related  to  the  county  of  Somerset.  The  date  of  the 
roll  is  about  Michaelmas,  1247. 

Memb.  i. 

Essoins  de  malo  lecii  taken  at  Cambridge  on  the  morrow  of  St. 
Michael,  in  the  thirty-first  year,  before  H[enry]  of  Bath  and 
his  companions,  justices  in  eyre. 

Essoins  de  malo  venievdi  taken  at  the  same  time. 

1 336.  Henry  de  Thomele,  attorney  of  the  Prioress  of  Stodlegh, 
against  Joan  de  Sumery  on  a  pica  of  dower,  by  Kichard  Berreyt. 
On  the  morrow  of  St.  Martin  before  the  justices  at  Huntingdon. 
He  has  pledged  his  faith.* 

Memb.  id. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Cambridge  on  the  octave  of 
St.  Michael. 

'  Northampton. 

'  This  entry  has  a  marginal  note  ^^  post  vistimy  The  Prior  had  prohably  claimed 
a  view:  *'^  post  visum  pet  i  turn  janbit  essonium  suut  in  ait  is  placitis,''^  Bract., 
fo.  297. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  353 

Memb,  2. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Cambridge  on  the  quindene  of 
St.  Michael. 

Memb.  3. 

Quindene  of  St.  Michael,  continued. 

1337.  Robert  de  Columbariis  against  John  le  Rus  on  a  plea 
of  land,  by  Geoffry  Russel.  On  the  octave  of  St.  Martin  at 
Huntingdon.^ 

1338.  John  de  Molendinis,  attorney  of  William  de  Bikeley, 
against  John  de  Burg'  on  a  plea  of  estovers,  by  Henry  de 
Gaddel. 

Memb.  6. 

Pleas  at  Cambridge  from  various  forinsec  counties,  on  the  octave 
of  St.  Michael,  in  the  thirty-first  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
[Henry],  son  of  King  John,  and  the  beginning  of  the  thirty- 
second  [year],'  before  H[enry]  of  Bath  and  his  companions, 
justices. 

1339.  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  the  Goldsmith,  by 
her  attorney,  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Master 
Thomas  Ashwy,  guardian  of  the  lands  and  heir  of  Nicholas  son 
of  Jordan,  on  a  plea  that  he  should  observe  to  her  the  fine  levied 
in  the  court  of  the  King  before  the  justices  at  Westminster 
between  the  said  Robert  and  Agnes,  demandants,  and  the  said 
Nicholas,  deforciant,  of  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of  Rolveston', 
with  the  appurtenances,  and  loos,  of  rent,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  the  same  manor,  the  chirograph  of  which,  etc.  Master  Thomas 
did  not  come,  etc.,  and  he  was  attached  by  Nicholas  Coppe  of 
Rolveston  {sic)  and  John  son  of  Vincent  Therefore  he  is  in  mercy. 
The  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  distrain  him  by  his  lands, 
etc.,  so  that  [the  sheriff]  should  have  his  body  before  the  justices 
at  Huntingdon  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Martin. 

Memb.  i&/. 
Further  of  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael  and  of  the  third  week. 

1340.  Walter  de  Materdon'  and  Cecily  his  wife  give  i  mark 

^  This  also  has  **post  tnsum  "  in  the  margin. 

'  The  regnal  year  of  Henry  III.  b^an  on  the  28th  October. 

2  Z 


354  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

for  a  licence  to  agree  with  Robert  Ceriti  on  a  plea  of  dower. 
Let  them  have  the  chirograph,  etc  By  pledge  of  Robert 
himself. 


ROLL  No.  342.    (Huntingdonshire.) 

This  roll,  consisting  of  nine  membranes,  is  devoted  to  so  much  of 
the  proceedings  at  Huntingdon,  before  Henry  of  Bath,  as  relates  to 
other  counties.  It  contains  pleas  and  essoins.  The  justices  were  at 
Huntingdon  on  the  morrow  of  All  Souls,  3  Nov.,  1247. 

Memb,  i. 

Pleas  of  divers  forinsec  counties  at  Huntindon  on  the  morrow 
of  All  Souls,  before  [Henry]  of  Bath  and  his  companions, 
justices  itinerant,  in  the  thirty-second  year  of  the  reign  of 
King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb,  id. 

Pleas  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Martin  and  All  Souls. 

1 34 1.  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  the  Goldsmith 
{aurifabrt),  by  her  attorney,  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Master  Thomas  de  Assewy,  guardian  of  the  land  and 
heir  of  Nicholas  son  of  Jordan,  on  a  plea  that  he  should  observe 
a  fine  levied  in  the  court  of  the  King  before  the  justices  at 
Westminster,  between  the  said  Robert  and  Agnes,  querents,  and 
the  said  Nicholas,  deforciant,  of  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of 
Bolveston  {sic\  with  the  appurtenances,  and  iooj.  of  rent,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  same  manor,  whereof  the  chirograph,  etc. 
Thomas  did  not  come,  etc.  The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he 
should  distrain  him  by  his  lands,  etc.,  so  that  he  should  have  his 
body  [here]  this  day,  and  the  sheriff  has  done  nothing  therein 
nor  sent  the  writ.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered,  as  he  [was 
ordered]  elsewhere,  that  he  should  distrain  him  by  all  his  lands, 
etc.,  so  that  he  should  have  his  body  at  Chelmcrford  on  the 
morrow  of  St.  Hilary,  etc.  and  let  the  sheriff  be  [there]  to  hear 
his  judgment,  etc.^ 

'  See  this  case,  No.  1339. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  355 

Memb,  3. 

1342.  Joan,*  formerly  the  wife  of  Godfrey  de  Crawecumb', 
by  her  attorney,  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  the 
Prioress  of  Stodleg'  on  a  pica  of  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of 
Crawecumb',  with  the  appurtenances,  which  she  claims  in  dower 
against  her,  etc.  The  Prioress  did  not  come,  and  she  had  this 
day  by  her  essoin  after  she  had  appeared  in  court  and  prayed  a 
view  of  the  land.  Judgment:  let  the  said  third  part  be  taken 
into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  let  her  be  summoned 
that  she  be  at  Chelmerford  in  three  weeks  after  Hilary  to  hear 
her  judgment,  etc.* 

Memb.  ^d. 

1343.  The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  summon  John 
le  Harpur  that  he  should  be  [here]  this  day  to  hear  the  record 
and  his  judgment  in  the  dispute  which  was  before  the  justices  at 
Westminster  between  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Ranulph 
Grubbe,  claimant,  and  the  said  John,  tenant,  of  one-third  part  of 
one  messuage  and  ten  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Eggewyk',  which  she  claims  in  dower  against  him,  etc.,  and  that 
he  should  summon  Peter  de  la  Mare  that  he  should  be  [here]  on 
the  same  day  to  warrant  John,  etc.,  or  to  show,  etc.,  so  that  the 
said  dispute  should  be  here  in  the  same  state  in  which  it  was  when 
it  was  adjourned  {attenninata  fuit)  to  be  before  the  justices  at 
the  first  assize,  etc.  (ad  primam  assisain)^  etc.,  and  the  sheriff 
has  done  nothing  therein,  nor  sent  the  writ.  Therefore,  as  before, 
the  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  summon  the  said  John  that 
he  should  be  at  Chelmerford  on  the  octave  of  St.  Hilary  to  hear 
the  record  and  his  judgment,  etc.,  and  that  he  should  summon 
the  said  Peter  to  warrant,  etc.  in  the  form  aforesaid,  and  so  let 
the  sheriff  be  [there]  to  hear  his  judgment,  etc.* 

Memb,  Sd. 

Essoins  de  malo  lecti  taken  at  Huntedon'  on  the  octave  of  St. 
Martin. 

1344.  Robert  de  Columbariis,  at  Caundel  in  the  county  of 

*  She  is  elsewhere  called  "Joan  de  Sumcry."    See  No.  1336. 
'  In  the  margin  is  **t"-     This  is  the  common  form  oi  est. 

^  This  is  one  of  the  several  varying  uses  of  the  word  asiiia. 

*  See  No.  1349. 


356  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Dorset  against  John  le  Rus,  on  a  plea  of  land  in  the  county  of 
Somerset,  by  Philip  le  Comwaleys  and  Hugh  le  Sannuner. 
If  not,'  on  the  octave  of  the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary,  at 
Chelmerford. 


ROLL  No.  318.    (Hertfordshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  a.d.  i  248.     See  also  the  next  following  rolL 

Memb,  i. 

Roll  of  Attorneys. 

1345.  Thomas,  parson  of  the  church  of  Stoke  Gunner,*  puts  in 
his  place  William  de  Heyles  against  Godfrey  de  Wambcrge, 
Prior  of  Goldclyve,  on  a  plea  of  rent,  etc 

Menib,  2. 

Pleas  of  juries  and  assizes  at  Herteford  before  H[enry]  of 
Bath  and  his  companions  on  the  morrow  of  the  Sunday 
after  Easter,  in  the  thirty-second  year  the  of  reign  of  King 
Henry,  son  of  King  John. 


ROLL  No.  319.    (Hertfordshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  about  Blaster,  1248.     It  comprises  essoins 
and  forinsec  pleas  only. 

Memb,  i. 

Essoins  de  malo  lecti  from  divers  forinsec  counties,  taken  at 
Herteford  on  the  morrow  of  the  Sunday  after  Easter 
{clausum  Pasche\  in  the  thirty-second  year  of  the  reign  of 
King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb,  id. 

Essoins  de  malo  lecti  taken  at  Herteford  on  the  quindene  of 
Easter,  in  the  thirty- second  year. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  the  same  time. 

*  I  take  this  to  mean  if  he  be  not  cnnfined  to  his  bed  90  that  he  cannot  have  the 
usual  extension  of  a  year  and  a  da  v.  There  is  a  marginal  note  "  A'/"— ^oAr/,  and 
we  see  in  No.  1347  that  lie  made  good  his  claim  tu  an  essoin  J€  malo  UctL 

'  Stogumber. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS  357 


Memb,  2. 

1 346.  Richard  de  Welkestede,  the  attorney  of  Master  Thomas 
Aswy,  against  Agnes  de  Bristoll'  on  a  plea  of  dower  and  on  a 
plea  of  fine  levied,  by  Richard  le  Duck. 

William  de  Sumercot,  the  other  attorney,  against  the  same, 
by  William  le  Mauveys. 

Mefnb,  6. 

Pleas  of  divers  forinsec  counties  on  the  morrow  of  the  Sunday 
after  Easter  at  Herteford,  before  H[enry]  of  Bath  and  his 
companions,  justices,  in  the  thirty-second  year  of  King 
Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

1347.  Robert  de  Lond',  Thomas  de  Gosle,  Adam  de  W'deton, 
and  Henry  de  Codinton,  four  knights  sent  to  Candel  in  the 
county  of  Dorset  to  Robert  de  Columbariis,  to  see  whether  the 
infirmity  for  which  he  was  essoined  de  malo  lecti  against  John  le 
Rus  on  a  plea  of  land  in  the  county  of  Somerset  be  bed-sickness 
or  not,  come  and  say  that  they  saw  him  sick  in  bed  {languiduni) 
on  the  day  of  St.  Agatha  the  virgin,  in  the  thirty-second  year,  and 
that  they  gave  him  a  day  at  the  Tower  of  London  in  one  year 
and  one  day  from  the  day  of  seeing  him,  etc.* 

Memb.  10. 

1348.  The  Abbot  of  Alenny  was  summoned  to  answer 
GeofTry  de  W'lmarston'  on  a  plea  that  he  should  observe  a 
covenant  made  between  them  concerning  twelve  acres  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Scotmor,  etc.  wherein  Geoflfry  com- 
plains that  while  the  covenant  between  him  and  the  abbot  that 
he,  Geoffry,  might  close  and  appropriate  to  himself  the  whole  of 
a  certain  alder-grove  in  the  said  moor,  saving  to  the  abbot 
twelve  acres  in  the  moor  next  the  meadow  of  the  abbot,  but  so 
that  if  the  abbot  should  make  any  purpresture  in  the  said  moor, 
that  purpresture  should  be  allocated  to  the  abbot  in  the  said 
twelve  acres,  and  that  the  whole  of  the  residue  of  the  moor  should 
be  equally  divided  between  them,  so  that  one-half  the  moor 
should  remain  to  the  abbot  and  the  other  half  to  Geoffry,  the 
said  abbot,  contrary  to  the  said  covenant,  has  occupied  fifteen 

See  No.  1376. 


35S  >OVER5ET5HTRE   PLEAS. 

acres  of  the  said  moor  beyond  the  said  tv^x  acres  and  half  the 
moor,  etc  Afterwards  a  cay  is  given  them  on  the  morrow  of 
Trinity  at  Bermundse^-e  on  the  pra\-er  of  the  parties*  and  the 
abbot  puts  in  his  place  Richard  Travet  or  CrikeieL  And  the 
abbot  comes,'  and  the>'  are  agreed  b\'  leave.  Let  tbem  have  the 
chirogn^h,  etc 

ilcmb.  lid, 

1349.  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Ranu!ph  Crabbe,  seck^ 
against  Peter  de  la  Mare,  whom  John  le  Harpur  ^xwched  to 
warranty  and  who  warrants  him.  one-third  part  of  one  messuage 
and  ten  acres  of  land,  with  the  apptirtenances,  in  Eggewjk,  as 
her  dower,  etc  Peter  comes  and  says  that  John  le  Harpur.  who 
vouched  him  to  warranty-  against  the  said  Matilda,  is  not  in 
seisin  of  the  said  third  part,  for  one  Robert,  pardon  of  the  dimch 
of  St.  James  of  Bath,  holds  it.  But  he  says  that  in  truth  Jc^m 
was  seised  thereof  when  Matilda's  writ  was  sought,  and  by  leave 
he  gave  up  to  Matilda  her  said  douer.  Let  her  have  her  seisin, 
etc  He  fiiily  concedes  that  he  should  make  up  to  Robert  an 
equi\'alent  in  value,  etc 

ilemb.  16. 

135a  Joan,  formerly  the  wife  of  Godfinej'  de  Crauwecumbe, 
b>'  her  attome>%  seeks  against  William  de  Idemestcn  one-third 
part  of  the  manor  of  Corf,  \*ith  the  appurtenances,  as  her  dower, 
etc  William  came  elsemhere,  and  x-ouched  to  warranty  the 
Prioress  of  Stodleg,  who  now,  b\'  summons,  etc  ^-arrants  him 
and  by  licence  gives  up  to  her  her  dower.  And  because  the 
Prioress  has  land  of  the  said  Godfrey,  formerly  Joans  husband, 
William  may  hold  in  peace  :  and  Jet  Joan  ha\-e  of  the  land  of  the 
Prioress  to  the  \-alue,  etc  And  because  the  Prioress  has  no  land 
in  the  county  of  Wilton.*  but  [has]  in  the  count}'  of  Somerset,  to 
wit,  in  Crauecumbe,  the  sherinf  of  Wiltshire  is  ordered  that  he 
should  make  an  extent  and  valuation  of  the  said  land,  and  the 
extent,  etc,  should  be  certined  by  him  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity 
at  Bermund*.  Then  let  Joan  ha\-c  of  the  land  of  the  Prioress  in 
the  said  \-ill  to  the  \'alue,  etc,  in  the  form  aforesaid,  etc     After- 

'  This  b  DO  d^cb:  a  r«"S*«cript-     Sec  No.  13114,  e:c. 
'  The  mar^ui  h&s  i>.ih  \V;I:>hI:e  aik:  SocDo^e:. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  359 

wards,  on  that  day,  the  sheriff  sent  the  extent,^  which  says  that 
the  whole  of  the  said  land  is  worth  per  annum  ;^i8  8s.  and  one 
pound  of  pepper.  Therefore  the  sheriff  of  Somerset  is  ordered 
that  without  delay  he  should  assign  to  John  of  the  land  of  the 
Prioress  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  to  wit,  at  Craucumbe  to  tlie 
value  of  one-third  part  of  the  said  lands. 

Memb.  i8. 

135 1.  William  de  Bolevill'  and  Ela  his  wife,  by  their  attorney, 
offer  themselves  on  the  fourth  day  against  Elyas  Belde  on  a 
plea  that  he  should  perform  to  them  the  customary  and  rustic 
services  which  he  ought  to  do  in  respect  of  the  free  tenement 
which  he  holds  of  them  in  Middelsowey,  etc.  Elyas  does  not 
come,  etc.  He  had  this  day  by  his  essoin.  Judgment :  let  him 
be  attached  that  he  be  at  the  next  coming  of  the  justices,  etc 


ROLL  No.  996.    (Wiltshire.) 

From  an  entry  at  the  foot  of  memb.  3^/.  we  find  that  the  justices 
were  to  be  at  Wilton  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity.  The  date  of  this  roll 
is  therefore  the  summer  of  a.d.  1249. 

Memb,  i. 

Pleas  of  juries  and  assizes  at  Wylton'  in  the  county  of  Wiltes'  on 
the  eyre  of  H[enryJ  of  Bath  and  his  companions,  justices 
itinerant,  in  the  thirty-third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry, 
son  of  King  John. 

Memb,  22. 

Roll  of  attorneys  at  Wylton  as  well  of  forinsec  counties  as  of  the 
county  of  Wilt*. 

1352.  Master  Carinus,  Archdeacon  of  Taunton',  puts  in  his 
place  William  Russel  against  Christiana  de  la  Bere,  on  a  plea 
of  dower,  etc. 


^  This  must  have  been  added  after  the  sittiog  at  Bermondsey. 


36o  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

ROLL  No.  871.    (Surrey.) 

This  is  a  roll  of  essoins  and  forinsec  pleas  only.     They  were  taken 
in  the  county  of  Surrey  after  Easter  in  1 248. 

Manb,  3. 

Pleas  of  divers  forinsec  counties  before  H[enry]  of  Bath  and  his 
companions,  justices  itinerant,  at  Bermundes'  in  five  weeks 
after  Easter,  in  the  thirty-second  year.* 

1353.  Master  Thomas  Aswy,  guardian  of  the  land  and  heir  of 
Nicholas  son  of  Jordan,  was  attached  to  answer  Agnes,  formerly 
the  wife  of  Robert  the  Goldsmith,  on  a  plea   that  he  should 
observe  to  her  a  fine*  levied  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King 
at  Westminster  between  them,  Robert  and  Agnes,  querents,  and 
the  said  Nicholas,  deforciant,  of  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of 
Rolueston*,  with  the  appurtenances,  and   iooj.  of  rent,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  same  manor,  of  which  the  chirograph,  etc., 
and  wherein  she  complains  that  while,  by  the  fine  aforesaid, 
she  ought  to  have   in  every   year  £\o  from  the  said  heir  for 
one-third  part  of  the  said  manor  for  the  whole  of  her  life  in  the 
name  of  dower,  the  said  Master,  the  guardian  of  the  said  heir, 
now  for  two  years  agone  has  detained  from  her  the  said  annual 
rent,  so  that    there    are    in  arrear   ;^20,  which   she    says    are 
detained  from  her,  and  she  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value 
of  ;f  30,  etc.     Master  Thomas  comes,  and  they  are  agreed  by 
licence.     The  agreement  is  such  that  the  said  Master  Thomas 
grants  that  he  will  pay  to  the  said  Agnes  during  the  whole  of 
her  life  in  every  year  the  said  ^lo  for  the  third    part  of  the 
said  manor  at  the  times  contained  in  the  aforesaid  fine,  and  for 
her  arrears  he  grants  to  Agnes  the  whole  of  the  next  autumn 
crop  (totam  vestituram  autumpni proximo  futuri\  to  be  taken  by 
the  hand  of  Agnes,  and  all  profits  {fructus),  rents,  and  issues 
coming  from  the  said  manor  until  next  Easter,  to  wit,  in  the 
thirty-third  year,  to  be  taken  by  the  hands  of  four  good  men 
{proborum  homiuum)  of  the  same  vill ;  but  so  that  if  in  the  mean- 
time any  woman  should  die  holding  any  tenement  in  the  same 

1  On  memb.  i  a  like  heading  concludes  thus  :  "  in  five  weeks  after  Easter  in  the 
thirty-second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John." 

^  This  fine  was  levied  at  Westminster  in  21  Hen.  III.  It  is  to  be  found  in 
«*  Som.  Fines,"  p.  102,  No.  16. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  361 

vill  in  dower,  that  [tenement]  should  remain  to  the  said  Master 
Thomas  ;  and  in  the  meantime  the  said  Master  Thomas  shall  be 
quit  of  payment  of  the  said  ;^io,  and  after  the  aforesaid  time  the 
said  Master  Thomas  shall  have  again  the  whole  of  the  said 
manor,  with  its  appurtenances,  paying  thereout  yearly  for  the 
third^  part  of  the  same  manor  the  said  ;f  10  as  is  aforesaid,  etc 

Memb.  4^/. 

Continuation  of  forinsec  counties  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity. 

1354.  A  day  is  given  to  Geoffry  de  Wolmerston,  querent,  and 
Robert,  abbot  of  Alegn*,  touching  the  taking  of  his  chirograph 
of  twelve  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Stokemore, 
on  the  morrow  of  All  Souls  at  Lewes  in  the  county  of  Sussex. 
And  be  it  known  that  it  is  noted  in  the  file  (Jigula)  of  notes,*  etc 


ROLL  No.  273.    (Gloucestershire.) 

A  roll  of  Gloucester  pleas  with  placita  forinseca.  The  portion  of  the 
roll,  from  memb.  29,  devoted  to  them  was  formerly  a  separate  roll,  which 
bore  the  reference  "  Coram  Rege  Roll,  No.  71."  In  the  previous  portion 
of  the  roll,  however,  on  memb.  21,  there  is  a  solitary  Somerset  plea, 
which  has  been  extracted  below.  On  the  same  membrane  there  are 
some  other  entries  which  bear  no  county  name.  As  they  are  not 
clearly  identified,  they  are  not  included  here.  The  date  of  the  roll  is 
A.D.  1248. 

Memb,  i. 

Pleas  and  assizes  taken  at  Gloucester  on  the  quindcne  of  Easter, 
in  the  thirty-second  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son 
of  King  John,  before  Roger  de  Thurkelby  and  his  com- 
panions. 

Memb,  21. 

1355.  Maurice  de  Salco  Marisco  and  Joan  his  wife  offered 
themselves  on  the  fourth  day  against  Eborard,  chamberlain  of 

'  The  roll  has  **pro  tota  parte  ejuscUtn  manerii^  which  I  think  is  a  clerical  error. 
'  That  is,  on  the  hie  of  notes  of  fines. 

3  A 


362  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

the  Abbot  of  Keynsham,  Jordan,  lay  brother  of  the  Abbot 
William  the  cook,  Nicholas  Tunesende,  William  Wildrigfal, 
Walter  Kene,  Henry  the  fisherman,  Adam  Gent,  Nigel  the 
fisherman,  Simon  the  baker,  Adam  of  the  Brewhouse  {de  la 
Bracerie),  John  Lacy,  Robert  de  Budicumb',  Adam  del  Ostel, 
John  Brun,  Peter  Hunderhil,  Andrew  de  Foute,  Richard  le 
Mcsser,^  Richard  Criket,  Ranulph  the  reeve,  Robert  Oldefel, 
Luke  the  tailor  {cissorem)^  and  Richard  le  Blund  on  a  plea  why, 
by  force  and  arms,  they  threw  down  a  certain  weir  {gurgitem)  in 
Bicton  to  the  injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Maurice  and  Joan  in 
the  same  vill,  and  wounded  certain  of  their  men  against  the  peace 
of  our  lord  the  King,  etc.  Eborard  and  the  others  do  not  come. 
They  were  attached  by  Payn  de  Meresfeld,  Alvred  de  Meresfeld, 
William  de  Hokford*,  and  Adam  de  la  Dune.  Judgment :  let 
them  be  put  under  better  pledges  that  they  be  at  Ivelcestr*  on 
the  first  assize,  etc     And  the  first  [pledges],  etc. 

Menib,  29. 

Pleas  of  assize  of  divers  counties  at  Gloucester,  before  Roger 
de  Thurkelby  and  his  companions,  in  the  thirty-second 
year  of  Henry  HI. 

1356.  Cecily,  formerly  the  wife  of  Hugh  de  Laplache,  puts 
in  her  place  Richard  de  Langhas  against  Walter  de  Dre  and 
Julia  his  wife  and  others  in  the  writ  [named]  on  a  plea  of  dower, 
etc.* 

Memb,  30. 

1357.  Richerus  de  Wytewell*  puts  in  his  place  Robert  de 
Calvesdon,  or  Ralph  de  Helesdon',  against  Thomas  de  Cyrncestr' 
on  a  plea  of  covenant. 

Memb,  32^. 

1358.  Custancia,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  de  Leches- 
wurth*,  seeks  against  Alexander  le  Camber  one  messuage,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Brigewautcr,  wherewith  the  said  William, 
formerly  her  husband,  endowed  her  at  the  church  door,  etc 
Alexander  comes   and  vouches  to  warranty  Robert   Fromund. 

*  As  to  this  name,  see  ant€y  note  to  No.  771. 

2  See  further  as  to  this  case,  No.   1360.     Walter  b  here  called  "de  Dre" ;  in 
No.  i36oheiji"Tcry.»' 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  363 


Let  him  have  him  [Robert]  at  Radinges^  on  the  quindene   of 
Trinity  by  help  of  the  court,  etc.* 

Memb.  33. 

1359.  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Alan, 
offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Walter  Cole  on  a  plea  of 
one-third  part  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Eston,  which  she  claims  as  her  dower,  etc.  Walter  did  not 
come,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment :  let  the  third 
part  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  the  day, 
etc.,^  and  let  him  be  summoned  that  he  be  at  Reading  on  the 
octave  of  Trinity,  etc 

Memb.  34. 

1359^.  Simon  de  Raleg',  by  his  attorney,  offered  himself  on 
the  fourth  day  against  John  de  Yatton  on  a  plea  that  he  should 
permit  him  [Simon]  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of 
Clavcrham,  which  is  vacant  and  is  in  his  gift,  etc.  John  did 
not  come,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment :  let  him  be 
attached  that  he  be  at  Gloucester  on  Tuesday  next  after 
Ascension  Day.* 

Memb.  35. 

1360.  Cecily,  formerly  the  wife  of  Hugh  de  la  Plesse,  offered 
herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Walter  Tery  and  Juliana  his 
wife  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  two  virgates  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Culeford,  and  against  Robert  Boye  and 
Agnes  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  two  parts  of  half 
a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  La  Yurde,  which 
third    parts  she  claims  in  dower  against  them.     They  did  not 

come,  and  they  were  summoned.     Judgment :  the  aforesaid 

{Here  the  entry— the  whole  of  which  is  struck  outy  ends — and  in 
the  margin  is  the  reason :  "  Vacated  because  they  had  a  day  by 
their  essoins."^) 

^  Reading.     In  the  margin  is  a  note,  which  also  occurs  frequently  elsewhere^  "f-" 
This  is  usually  equivalent  to  '*  ^/,"  but  I  cannot  explain  its  significance  here. 

*  See  No.  1329. 

'  The  day  of  taking  that  is,  which  has  to  be  notified.    This  case  also  has  tbe 
marginal  "  t"  and  the  woid  •*  Berk':'    See  No.  1364. 

^  .'>te  No.  1 361.  *  See  Not.  13561 1^ 


564  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb.  4a 

1 361.  Simon  de  Raleg*,  by  his  attorney,  offered  himself  on 
the  fourth  day  against  John  de  Yatton  on  a  plea  that  he  [John] 
should  permit  him  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  erf" 
Claverham,  which  \s  vacant  and  is  in  his  gift,  etc  John  did 
not  come,  and  the  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  attach  him 
that  he  should  be  here  to-day,  etc.  The  sheriff  has  certified 
that  [John]  has  no  lay  fee  in  his  bailliwick  by  which,  etc 
Therefore  the  official  of  the  Bishop  of  Bath  is  ordered  that  he 
should  cause  [John]  to  come  to  Rading  on  the  quindene  of 
St  John  the  Baptist* 

1362.  The  dispute  between  Rogeride  Berkhamested,  querent, 
and  John  Tyke  and  Margery  his  wife,  and  many  others  in  the 
turrit  [named],  on  a  plea  why,  by  force  and  arms,  etc.  is  put  in 
respite  until  the  quindene  of  St  Michael,  at  Hereford,  because 
the  said  John,  the  husband  of  Margery,  was  in  Ireland  before  the 
writ  was  sought,  and  has  not  yet  returned. 


ROLL  No.  39.    (Berkshire.) 

This  is  evidently  part  of  a  larger  rolL  The  membrane  now  num- 
bered I  was  formerly  memb.  29.  Memb.  2  was  formerly  memb.  21, 
and  so  on  up  to  memb.  28  by  the  old  numbering.  It  is  a  file  of 
placita  forinseca  only.  The  date  to  be  assigned  to  it  is  the  summer  of 
1248. 

Memb.  i. 

Assizes  at  Rading,*  before  Roger  de  Thurkelby  and  his  com- 
panions, in  the  thirty-second  year  of  Henry  IIL 

Memb.  2. 

1363.  Christiana  Luvel  puts  in  her  place  Robert  de  Marisco, 
or  Peter  de  Mara,  against  Richard  Luvel  on  a  plea  of  fine  levied 
and  on  a  plea  of  debt 

»  Sec  No.  1359a.  *  Reading 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  36$ 


Memb.  3. 

1364.  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Alan, 
offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Walter  Cole  on  a  plea  of 
one-third  part  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Eston',  which  she  claims  in  dower  against  him.  Walter  did 
not  come,  and  he  made  default  elsewhere,  to  wit,  before  the 
justices  at  Gloucester  on  the  quindene  of  Easter,  so  that  the 
sheriff"  was  ordered  that  he  should  take  the  said  third  part  into 
the  hand  of  our  lord  the  King.  And  the  day,  etc.  And  the 
sheriff"  certified  the  day  of  taking  and  that  he  was  summoned, 
etc.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Matilda  should  recover  her 
seisin  against  him  by  default     And  Walter  is  in  mercy.^ 

Mefftb.  5. 

1365.  Philip  de  Knoll'  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  John  le  Sarazin,  Dean  of  Wells,  on  a  plea  why  he  held  a 
plea  in  court  christian  concerning  the  lay  fee  of  him,  Philip,  in 
Knoir  contrary  to,  etc.  John  did  not  come,  etc.  He  was 
attached  by  Walter  de  la  Splotte  and  Robert  Wydom.  There- 
fore let  him  be  put  under  better  pledges  that  he  be  at  Shrews- 
bury in  one  month  after  Michaelmas,  and  the  first,  etc' 

1366.  Agnes,  wife  of  Roger  de  Calemundesden,  puts  in  her 
place  Roger  her  husband  against  William  ie  Bret  on  a  plea  of 
fine  levied,  etc. 

Memb,  6. 

1367.  Cecily,  formerly  the  wife  of  Hugh  de  la  Plesse,  by  her 
attorney,  offered  herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Robert  Boye 
and  Agnes  his  wife  on  a  plea  of  one-third  part  of  two  parts  of 
half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  La  Yerde,  which 
she  claims  in  dower  against  him.  Robert  and  Agnes  did  not 
come.  They  had  a  day  by  their  essoin  to  this  day.  Judgment: 
let  the  said  third  part  be  taken  into  the  hand  of  our  lord  the 
King.  And  the  day,  etc.  And  they  are  summoned  that  they 
be  at  Shrewsbury  in  five  weeks  from  Michaelmas. 

>  See  Nos   1359,  1369. 

^  This  means  that  John's  first  pledges  are  to  be  there  to  be  amerced  for  not  pro- 
ducing him.     See  Bract.,  fo.  440. 


366  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Mentb.  yd. 

1368.  Denise,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  de  Hadimer, 
seeks  against  Roger  Attasle  and  Hawise  his  wife  one-third  part 
of  two  virgates  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Haddimer,  as 
her  dower,  etc.  Roger  and  Hawise  come,  and  they  are  agreed. 
Roger  gives  \  mark  for  a  licence  to  agree  by  pledge  of  Robert 
fitz  Payn,  and  the  agreement  is  such  that  Denise  releases  to 
them  the  whole  for  20?.,  which  they  are  to  pay  her  on  the  festival 
of  St.  Peter  ad  vincula,  in  the  thirty-second  year,  and  if  they  do 
not  it  is  conceded  that  they  may  be  distrained. 

Memb,  8. 

1369.  Thomas  Cole,  by  Walter  Aleyn,  on  Sunday,  to  wit,  in 
three  weeks  after  Trinity,  seeks  his  land  by  plevin,  etc.,  through 
the  default  which  he  made  against  Matilda,  who  was  the  wife  of 
William  Aleyn,  etc.     And  he  has,  etc^ 

Memb,  9. 

1370.  The  same  William  de  Tracy*  offered  himself  on  the 
fourth  day  against  John  the  Dean,  Henry  the  Treasurer,  and 
William  the  Chancellor  of  Welles  on  a  plea  why  they  held  pleas 
in  court  christian  concerning  chattels  which  were  not,  eta,* 
contrary  to,  etc  They  did  not  come.  The  sheriff  was  ordered 
that  he  should  attach  them,  etc.  And  the  sheriff  certified  that 
he  notified  the  aistodes  of  the  Bishopric  of  Bath,  who  have  done 
nothing.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  not 
omit,  by  reason  of  the  liberty  of  the  bishopric,  to  attach  them  to 
be  at  Shrewsbury  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Martin,  etc. 

Memb,  gd. 

1 37 1.  Christiana  Luvel,  by  her  attorney,  offered  herself  on  the 
fourth  day  against  Richard  Luvel  on  a  plea  that  he  should 
observe  to  her  the  fine  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King 

>  Here  Thos.  Cole  seeks  to  replevin  his  land  taken  into  the  King's  hand.  Sec 
No.  1364  and  note  to  No.  1332.  The  form  of  inrolment  of  such  a  claim  is  given  in 
Hracton,  fo.  365b. 

"  The  j^revious  entry  on  the  roll  relates  to  a  claim  by  William  in  respect  of 
pco|>erty  in  Devon.  *  Seea/«/<r,  No.  392. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  367 

before  the  justices  itinerant  at  Yvelcestr*,  between  Richard 
CoteF  and  the  said  Christiana  his  wife,  querents,  and  the  said 
Richard,  tenant,  concerning  the  dower  of  Christiana  in  ^Kary, 
Wykalton',  and  Pidecumbe,^  with  the  appurtenances,  and  the 
advowson  of  the  church  of  Kares,  whereof  the  chirograph,  etc. 
Richard  did  not  come,  etc.  He  was  attached  by  William  de 
Thorn  and  Hugh  Wysdom  of  Kaiy.  Therefore  let  him  be  put 
under  better  pledges  that  he  be  at  Hereford  on  the  quindene  of 
St.  Michael,  and  the  first,  etc.* 

1372.  The  same  Christiana,  by  her  attorney,  offered  herself  on 
the  fourth  day  against  the  said  Richard  Luvel  on  a  plea  that  he 
should  pay  her  100  marks  which  he  owes  her,  etc.  Richard 
did  not  come,  etc.  and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  Judgment: 
attach  him  so  that  he  be  at  Shrewsbury  at  the  same  time. 


ROLL  No.  yyy.    (Hampshire.) 

This  roll  of  32  membranes  is  calendared  as  containing  the  forinsec 
business  at  Winchester  in  1248-9,  Hilary,  33  Henry  III.  The  de- 
scription is,  however,  incomplete,  for  the  roll  comprises  also  a  dupli- 
cate of  forinsec  business  in  Wiltshire  after  Easter.  See  Roll  No.  997, 
infra, 

Memb.  i. 

Pleas  of  divers  counties  at  Winchester  in  the  county  of  South- 
ampton on  the  eyre  of  H[enry]  of  Bath  and  his  companions, 
justices  itinerant,  on  the  morrow  of  Hilary,  in  the  thirty- 
third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb.  3. 

Continuation  of  divers  counties  at  Winchester  on  the  octave  and 
from  the  quindene  of  Hilary. 

1373.  Emma,  formerly  the  wife  of  Philip  de  W'rth,  offered 
herself  on  the  fourth  day  against  Alan  de  Forneus  on  a  plea  of 
one- third  part  of  one  messuage,  thirty-five  acres  of  land,  and  one 
acre  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Worth,  which  she 

^-*  Castle  Gary,  Wincanton,  and  Pitcombe. 
"  See  ni  te  to  No.  1365. 


368  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAa 

claims  in  dower  against  him,  etc  Alan  did  not  come,  etc 
The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  summon  him  to  be 
[here]  this  day,  and  the  sheriff  certified  that  Emma  had  not 
found  pledges  to  prosecute.  Upon  this  it  is  testified  that  she 
did  find  pledges,  and  that  the  sheriff,  by  favour  towards  her 
adversary,  would  not  endorse  (indossare)  her  pledges.  Emma 
comes,  and  offers  here  to  find  security  to  prosecute  by  her  faith 
(i>er  fidem  suam)  because  she  is  poor.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is 
ordered  that  he  should  summon  him  to  be  at  Wilton  in  three 
weeks  after  Easter  day.^ 

1374.  Thomas  de  Perton  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Hugh  de  DenepoF  and  Margery  his  wife  on  a  plea  that 
they  should  observe  a  covenant  between  them  touching  two 
carucates,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Denepol  and  Galumpton'. 
Hugh  and  Margery  did  not  come,  and  they  were  summoned,  etc 
Judgment :  attach  them  that  they  be  at  Wilton  in  one  month 
after  Easter  day.* 

Memb.  6. 

Continuation  of  [pleas]  of  divers  counties  in  three  weeks  after 
Hilary. 

1375.  Geoffry  de  Mandevill  offered  himself  on  the  fourth  day 
against  Thomas  de  Breton  on  a  plea  that  he  should  observe  a 
covenant  between  them,  made  concerning  two  knights'  fees,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  Cherleton  of  Henry  son  of  Richard,  and 
of  William  son  of  Adam,  etc.  Thomas  did  not  come,  etc  and 
he  had  this  day  by  his  essoin.  Judgment :  attach  him  that  he 
be  at  Wilton  in  three  weeks  after  Easter.* 

Meinb,  8. 

Continuation  of  [pleas]  of  forinsec  counties  in  three  weeks,  and 
on  the  octave  of  St.  Hilary. 

1376.  John  le  Rus  sought,  before  the  justices  in  banco^ 
against  Robert  de  Columbariis  three  carucates  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Lameyet  as  his  right,  and  whereof  one  Robert, 
his  ancestor,  was  seised  in  his  demesne  as  of  fee  and  of  right  in 
the  time  of  King  Henry,  grandfather  of  our  lord  the  King  who 

>  See  No.  1389.  «  Galmington  in  Wilton.    See  No.  1393 

'  Charlton  Adam'    See  No.  1386 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  369 


now  is,  taking  therefrom  profits  to  the  value,  etc..  and  from  him 
Robert,  the  right  in  that  land  descended  to  one  Ralph,  as  son 
and  heir,  and  from  Ralph  the  right  in  that  land  descended  to 
one  Roger  as  son  and  heir,  and  from  Roger  to  him,  John,  who 
now  seeks,  as  son  and  heir,  and  that  such  is  his  right  he  offers, 
etc.  The  same  Robert  first  essoined  himscM  de  malo  veniendi^ 
and  afterwards  de  malo  lecti.  He  was  seen  sick  in  bed  {langiiidus) 
by  four  knights  who  were  sent  to  him,  to  wit,  on  St.  Agatha's 
day,  in  the  thirty-second  year,^  and  they  gave  him  a  day  in  one 
year  and  one  day  from  the  day  of  view  at  the  Tower  of  London. 
In  the  following  year  the  same  Robert  appeared  at  the  Tower 
of  London,  to  wit,  on  Saturday  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Agatha,  in 
the  thirty-third  year,  and  offered  himself  against  the  said  John 
who  was  present,  and  a  day  was  given  him  by  the  constable  of 
the  said  Tower  on  Monday  next  following,  before  H.  of  Bath  and 
his  companions  itinerant,  at  Winchester,  in  the  county  of  South- 
ampton. John  now  comes,  and  says  that  Robert  did  not  keep 
the  day  so  given  [him]  by  the  four  knights,  because,  he  says, 
the  view  was  made  on  the  festival  of  the  said  Agatha  the  Virgin 
in  the  thirty-second  year,  as  is  aforesaid,  which  in  that  year  was 
a  Wednesday,  so  that  Robert  ought  to  have  appeared  on  the 
Friday  next  after  the  same  festival  in  the  thirty-third  year  ;  and 
because  he  did  not  appear  either  on  the  Thursday  or  the  Friday, 
he  [John]  claims  a  default  and  seeks  judgment  Robert  comes, 
and  fully  confesses  that  the  view  by  the  four  knights  was  made 
on  St.  Agatha's  day  in  the  thirty-second  year*  as  is  aforesaid, 
and  that  a  day  was  given  him  in  one  year  and  one  day  from  the 
day  of  view  at  the  Tower  of  London,  and  he  says  that  because 
that  year  was  bisextile  so  in  the  year  last  past  the  day  of  the 
said  festival  was  Wednesday,  and  this  year  Friday,  and  he 
appeared  in  person  at  the  Tower  of  London  on  Saturday,  to 
wit,  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Agatha.  He  says,  also,  that  out  of 
abundant  [caution]  he  sent  to  the  Tower  a  sufficient  sponsor 
{responsalem)y  to  wit,  John  Picot,  on  Friday  next  before  the  said 
Saturday,  who  offered  himself  as  his  [Robert's]  sponsor,  and 
was  ready  to  answer  for  him  if  it  should  be  necessary,  and  if 
anyone  would  sue  against  him,  and  if  the  court  should  consider 
that  he  ought  to  appear  on  the  Friday.  On  this  he  puts  him- 
self upon  the  /:onstable  of  the  Tower,  if  it  should  be  necessary. 


^  See  No.  1347. 

'  That  was  on  Feb.  5,  1247-8. 

3  B 


370  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


John  says  that  on  the  said  Friday,  to  wit,  on  the  festival  of  St. 
Agatha,  he  waited  at  the  Tower  of  London  from  the  morning 
{a  mane)  to  the  ninth  hour  {ad  oram  nonam),  and  that  on  that  day 
the  said  Robert  did  not  appear  in  person  or  by  a  sufficient  sponsor, 
and  as  to  this  he  puts  himself  upon  the  constable  of  the  said  Tower. 
And  John  puts  in  his  place  William  le  Criur.  Afterwards  it  is 
witnessed  for  the  constable  of  the  Tower^  that  the  said  John 
offered  himself  at  the  Tower  of  London  on  Thursday  next  after 
the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary,  in  the  thirty-third  year, 
against  Robert  de  Columbariis,  and  there  waited  until  the  ninth 
hour  ;  and  likewise  on  the  Friday  following  John  appeared  at 
the  Tower,  and  at  length  one  John  Picot  came  and  spake  these 
words :  **  lord  Robert  de  Columbariis  who  was  viewed  sick  in 
bed  by  four  knights  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Agatha  in  the  year 
last  past  will  come  later,  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Agatha."  On 
being  questioned  whether  he  was  attorney  or  sponsor  for  Robert, 
John  Pycot  said  that  he  was  not,  but  he  said  positively  that  his 
lord  would  come  later,  and  on  the  Saturday  the  said  Robert  de 
Columbariis  appeared  in  person  at  the  Tower,  to  wit,  on  the 
morrow  of  St.  Agatha,  and  a  day  was  given  them  by  the 
constable  Monday  next  after  the  Purification,  before  [H.]  of 
Bath  and  his  companions  at  Winchester.  John  le  Rus  seeks 
judgment  by  default,  [for]  Robert  says  that  he  sent  the  said 
John  [Picot]  to  the  Tower  as  his  sponsor,  and  he  vouched  him 
for  his  sponsor,  and  he  [John]  was  an  insufficient  sponsor.* 

^  The  constable  of  the  Tower  had  a  court  of  record  of  facts  such  as  this,  but  not 
in  matters  of  law  or  judgment  (Bract.,  fo.  360b).  It  was  his  duty  to  inrol  these 
attendances  at  the  Tower  and  what  claims  the  parties  made,  refernng  them  to  the 
justices  for  adjudication  (1^.).  The  day  was  given  at  the  Tower  in  the  case  of  bed- 
sickness,  because  manifestly  the  knights  making  the  view  could  not  forecast  with 
certainty  whether  the  King's  justices  would  be  in  the  county  or  in  banco  on  the 
expiration  of  the  year  and  a  day. 

'-*  See  further  No.  1385.  At  this  time  there  was  a  doubt  amongst  the  justices 
whether,  in  the  case  of  leap  year,  an  essoinee  should  present  himself  on  the  366th  day 
or  on  the  367th.  Bracton  seems  to  have  considered  that  he  should  be  present  on  the 
former  day,  not  earlier  lest  he  should  not  have  duly  observed  his  periwl  of  bed- 
sickness,  and  not  later  lest  he  should  be  held  to  be  in  default  for  not  keeping  the  day 
assigned  to  him  :  Bract.,  fo.  359b  and  360.  See  also  **  Bracton's  Note  Book,"  note  to 
pi.  1291,  where  Prof.  Maitland  says  **  the  upshot  of  the  above  argument  is  that  the 
essoinee  has  always  exactly  the  same  length  of  time  before  he  need  appear,  whether 
or  no  the  year  be  leap  year.  But  the  so-called  Statute  of  leap  year  declares  that  for 
this  purpose  the  additional  day  in  a  leap  year  is  to  be  reckoned  as  making  but  one 
(lay  with  that  which  precedes  it,  so  that  sometimes  the  essoinee  will  get  an  additional 
day."  Prof.  Maitland  considers  the  best  authority  for  this  Statute  to  be  Close  Roll, 
40  Ileo.  III.,  m.  I2d,  date  9  May,  1256. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  37I 

Metnb.  I  a 
Continuation  [of  pleas]  of  forinsec  counties  at  Winton  on  the 
octave  and  quindcne  of  the  Purification. 

1377.  William  dc  Aguilun  and  Isabella  his  wife  offered  them- 
selves on  the  fourth  day  against  Robert  Gurnay  on  a  plea  that 
he  should  permit  them  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of 
Saunford,  which  is  vacant  and  of  which  the  gift  belongs  to  them. 
Robert  did  not  come,  and  he  was  summoned,  etc  Judgment : 
attach  him  that  he  be  at  Wilton  in  fifty  days  after  Easter,' 

Memb.  12. 
Pleas  of  divers  forinsec  counties  at  Wylton'  in  the  county  of 
Wylt',  before  H[enry]  of  Bath  and  his  companions,  justices 
itinerant,   on    the    quindene  of  Easter,  in  the  thirty-third 
year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb.  12a. 

1378.  Sybil,  formerly  the  wife  of  Robert  Bagedripe,  Stephen 
Mich|el],  and  Sarah  his  wife,  were  attached  to  answer  the  Prior 
of  Taunton'  on  a  plea  that  they  should  observe  towards  him  a 
fine"  levied  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King  before  the  justices 
itinerant  at  Yvecestr'  between  Sybil,  Stephen,  and  Sarah, 
claimants,  and  the  Prior,  tenant,  of  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Batpol',  whereof  the  chirograph,  etc.,  and 
wherein  the  Prior  complains  that,  while  by  the  said  fine  he 
should  hold  of  them  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  the  same  vill  in  free  and  perpetual  alms,  doing  such  forinsec 
service  as  should  appertain  to  the  said  land,  to  wit,  the  twentieth 
part  of  one  knight's  fee,  for  all  services,  so  that  the  same  Sybil, 
Stephen,  and  Sarah  ought  to  warrant  the  said  land  to  the  Prior, 
and  to  acquit  and  defend  him  against  all  people  in  perpetuity 
for  the  aforesaid  service,  the  Abbot  of  Glaston,  the  chief  lord 
of  that  fee,  distrained  the  Prior  for  suit  at  his  court  of  Mulketon' 
every  three  weeks,  and  likewise  distrained  him  for  a  rent  of  $s., 
which  he  demands  in  respect  of  the  said  tenement,  so  that,  in 

'  See  Na  1383. 
'  This  line  was  Levi 
Fine*,'  p.  8^  No.  iSo. 


372  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


default  of  their  acquittance,  he  has  paid  to  the  Abbot  2$s.,  to 
wit,  the  whole  of  the  said  rent  for  five  years ;  wherefore  he  says 
that  he  is  injured,  and  has  [incurred]  damage  to  the  value  of 
loos.y  and  he  proffers  the  fine,  which  testifies  this,  etc.  Sybil 
and  the  others  come  and  fully  admit  the  fine,  and  whatever  is 
contained  therein,  and  cannot  deny  that  the  Prior,  by  their  de- 
fault, was  distrained  for  the  said  suit  and  for  the  said  rent,  nor 
that  the  Prior,  by  their  default,  has  paid  25^.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  for  the  future  they  should  acquit  the  said  Prior 
against  the  Abbot  as  well  in  respect  of  the  said  suit  as  of  the 
said  rent,  and  should  satisfy  the  Prior's  damages,  which  are 
taxed^  at  25^.,  and  should  be  committed  to  gaol  for  their 
transgression.  The  sheriff  is  ordered  that  he  should  distrain 
them  to  acquit  the  Prior  in  future,  and  that  he  should  levy 
the  2  5 J.  upon  their  lands  and  pay  them  to  the  Prior  for  his 
damages.  Afterwards  Sybil  and  the  others  came  and  made 
fine  for  i  mark.* 

Memb.  13^. 

1379.  Robert  Gurnay  was  summoned  to  answer  William 
Agylun  and  Isabella  his  wife  on  a  plea  that  he  should  permit 
them  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of  Stanford,  which  \s 
vacant  and  is  in  their  gift,  etc.,  and  whereon  the  said  William 
and  Isabella  say  that  it  belongs  to  them  to  present  to  the  said 
church,  because  they  say  that  the  advowson  of  that  church 
belonged  to  one  Roger  de  Vilers,  formerly  Isabella's  husband, 
whose  son  and  heir  is  in  the  custody  of  Peter  de  Ryvill,  so  that 

(The  whole  of   this    entry    is    struck  out,    and   in     the 

margin  is  written  error  alibi  eras. ^ 


1 


Memb,  16. 


1380.  The  Prior  of  Glocue  (Goldclive)  was  summoned  to 
answer  Thomas,  parson  of  Stok'  Gomcr,*  on  a  plea  that  he  [the 
Prior]  should  render  to  him  two  crops  of  one  acre  of  oats  and 
one  quarter  of  flour*  {siiigin)  in  respect  of  an  annual  rent  of 
the  crop  of  one  acre  of  oats  and  half  a  quarter  of  flour  which 

*  Roll  997  says,  **  by  the  justices." 

^  This  fine  was.  c(  course,  to  relieve  themselves  from  the  iniprisonment. 
^  Ste  Nos.  1377  and  1383. 

*  Stoguml)cr.  »  Or  perhaps  wheat. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  373 

he  owes  him  [Thomas],  in  Menekesclver,*  etc.  The  Prior  comes, 
and  they  are  agreed.  Thomas  gives  ^  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree,  by  pledge  of  the  Prior  himself.  Let  them  have  the 
chirograph,  etc.* 

Memb.  i6d. 

1 38 1.  A  day  is  given  to  Geoffry  de  Wolmerston',*  querent, 
and  Robert,  abbot  of  AHgny,*  to  take  their  chirograph*  of  twelve 
acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Stakemor*,  at  West- 
minster, on  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael  on  the  prayer  of  the 
parties.  And  be  it  known  that  it  is  noted  upon  the  file  of 
notes,*  etc 

1382.  Robert  Ridel  seeks  against  Jordan  Ridel  one  carucate 
of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Cusington',  as  his  right,  etc 
Jordan  comes  and  craves  judgment'  and  a  view.  Let  him  have 
it.  A  day  is  given  them  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices,  and 
in  the  meantime,  etc 

Memb,  17. 

1383.  Robert  de  Gurnay  was  summoned  to  answer  William 
Aguillun**  and  Isabella  his  wife  on  a  plea  why  he  did  not  permit 
them  to  present  a  fit  person  to  the  church  of  Saunford,"  which  is 
vacant  and  is  in  their  gift,  etc  And  whereon  William  and 
Isabella  say  that  it  is  lor  them  to  present  to  the  said  church, 
because,  they  say,  the  advowson  of  the  church  belonged  to  one 
Roger  de  Vilers,*"  formerly  husband  of  Isabella,  whose  son  and 
heir  is  in  the  custody  of  Peter  dc  Rivill,  so  that  the  same  Roger 
presented  one  Hubert  of  Welles  to  the  said  church,  who,  on  his 
presentation,  was  admitted  and  instituted.  And  they  say  that 
Roger,  when  he  married  Isabella,  dowered  her  at  the  church 
door  with  certain  lands  and  tenements  in  the  said  vill  of 
Saunford,  together  with  the  said  advowson.  Robert  comes  and 
defends  the  lorce  and  injury,  etc.,  and  fully  defends  that  William 

^  Monksilver.  *  See  •'Som.  Fines,"  p.  148,  Na  73. 

»  "  Welcmerston  "  in  Roll  No.  997. 

*  *•  AUygny  "  in  Roll  No  997,  i.e.  Athelney.     See  No*.  1348  and  1354. 
^  I  have  not  been  able  to  trace  this  fine. 
®  That  is,  of  notes  of  fines. 

"  Roll  No.  997  says  nothing  about  "judgment,"  which  is  no  doubt  a  clerical  error 
here.  ^  '*  Agyllum  *'  in  Roll  No.  997. 

«•  Sandford  Orcas.  "  •*  Vylcrs  "  in  Roll  No.  997. 


374  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

and  Isabella  have  any  claim  to  the  said  advowson,  for,  he  says, 
if  anyone  could  claim  anything  in  that  advowson,  then  Peter  de 
Russell*  ought  to  claim,  for  he  has  the  custody  of  the  land  and 
heir  of  Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is  warrantor  of  the  dower  of 
Isabella.  And  William  and  Isabella,  asked  if  they  have  any 
charter  or  suit  [to  prove]  that  she  was  endowed  by  name  with 
certain  lands  together  with  the  said  advowson,  say  no,  but  ask 
that  inquest  should  be  made  by  the  country.  And  because  the 
said  William  de  Vilers  (mistake  for  Aguillun)  and  Isabella  are 
not  able  to  show  that  she  was  endowed  with  the  said  advowson 
by  name,  or  that'  she  has  any  other  advowson,  or  land,  or  tene- 
ment of  Roger  de  Vilers,  formerly  Isabella's  husband,  within 
the  extent  of  the  advowson  of  that  church,  it  is  considered  that 
Robert  [may  go]  without  a  day,  and  William  and  Isabella  are  in 
mercy,  etc. 

1384.  The  same  Robert  de  Gurnay,  William  Aguillun,  and 
Isabella  his  wife,  were  summoned  to  answer  Peter  de  Russell*  on 
a  plea  why  they  do  not  permit  him,  Peter,  to  present  a  fit  person 
to  the  church  of  Saunford,  which  is  vacant  and  is  in  his  gift,  etc., 
and  whereon  Peter  says  that  it  is  for  him  to  present  to  that 
church  by  reason  of  one  Roger  de  Vilers,  son  and  heir  of  Roger 
de  Vilers,  who  is  under  age  and  in  his  custody,  for,  he  says,  that 
one  Richard  de  Orekoyl,*  who  formerly  held  the  manor  of 
Saunford  with  the  said  advowson,  had  two  sisters,  who,  after  the 
death  of  Richard  without  heir  of  his  body,  divided  between  them 
the  whole  of  Richard's  inheritance,  and  it  was  agreed  between 
them  that  they  and  their  heirs  should  alternately  and  suc- 
cessively present  to  the  said  church.  So  that  the  aforesaid* 
Matilda  and  her  heirs  should  present  one  turn  when  the  church 
should  be  vacant,  and  the  aforesaid  Alice  and  her  heirs  the  other 
turn.  He  says  that  of  Matilda  there  was  issue  one  William  fitz 
Payn  {Wills, JiL  Pagani)^  who  is  under  age  and  in  the  custody 
of  the  said  Robert  de  Gurnay.  Of  Alice  there  was  issue  the 
said  Roger  son  of  Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is  in  custody  of  him, 
Peter.  He  says  also  that  one  William  son  of  John,  grandfather 
of  the  said  William  fitz  Payn,  whose  heir  he  is,  and  who  is  in  the 

1  «*RyviH"inRollNo.  997. 

"  In  Roll  No.  997  it  inns  thus  : — "or  that  the  heir  of  Roger  de  Vylers,  formerly 
Isabella's  husband,  should  have  any  other  advowson,  or  land,  or  tenement  within  the 
extent,"  etc.  »  **  Ruvilis  "  in  Roll  No.  997. 

''  •*  Deorecuyl  "  in  Roll  No.  997. 

^  This  word  is  a  slip.     Matilda  is  now  named  for  the  first  time. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  375 


custody  of  the  said  Robert  de  Gurnay,  last  presented  one  Walter 
the  clerk  to  the  said  church,  who,  on  his  presentation,was  admitted 
and  instituted  and  at  last  died  parson  thereof,  [and  that]  Peter 
should  now  present  to  the  said  church  by  reason  of  the  said 
Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is  in  his  custody.  Peter  also  says  that 
William  de  Aguillun  and  Isabella  his  wife  unjustly  prevent  him 
from  presenting  to  the  church,  for,  he  says,  they  have  nothing  in 
that  vill  except  the  dower  which  fell  to  Isabella  of  the  free 
tenement  which  belonged  to  Roger  de  Vilers  her  first  husband ; 
and  inasmuch  as  the  heir  of  Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is  in  Peter's 
custody,*  has  no  other  advowson  of  a  church  which  could 
belong  to  the  two  parts  of  his  land  which  is  {sic  in  both  rolis)  in 
Peter's  hand,  he  says  that  William  and  Isabella  cannot  claim 
anything  in  respect  of  that  advowson.  Robert  de  Gurnay  and 
the  others  come  and  defend  the  force  and  injury,  etc.  Robert 
says  that  he  unjustly*  prevented  Peter  from  presenting  to  the 
said  church  because,  he  says,  all  the  ancestors  of  William,  son 
and  heir  of  Payn,  son  of  William,  who  is  under  age  and  in  his 
custody,  have  always  presented  to  that  church.  Thus,  William 
son  of  John,  his  [William  the  youngcr's]  grandfather,  first  pre- 
sented one  Walter  of  Wells  to  the  said  church,  who,  on  his 
presentation,  was  admitted  and  instituted.  Afterwards,  on  the 
resignation  of  Walter,  he,  William,  presented  one  Hubert  son  of 
the  said  Master  Walter  of  Wells.  Afterwards  the  Legate  Otto 
deprived  Hubert  of  the  church,  because  he  was  the  son  of  the 
last  incumbent  (proximo  administrantis)?  Then  William  pre- 
sented one  Albcric,*  who  at  last  died  parson  of  the  same  [church]. 
Also  he  says  that  thus  from  clerk  to  clerk  the  ancestors  of  the 
said  William  fitz  Payn  have  always  presented  their  clerks 
successively  to  the  said  church,  and  he  fully  defends^  the  said 
agreement  which  Peter  says  was  made  between  the  ancestress  of 
William  fitz  Payn  and  the  ancestress  of  Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is 
in  Peter's  custody,  concerning  the  advowson  of  the  said  church, 
to  wit,  that  they  should  alternately  present  to  the  church  when 
it  should  be  vacant     Peter,  being  asked  if  he  had  any  instrument 

*  "  and  who  is  warrantor  of  Isabella's  dower  ^  in  Roll  No,  997. 

*  This  must  \it  a  slip,  or  nunquam  may  have  Ueen  accidentally  oniitterl.     Roll 
^o*  997  i>^^  ** justly''  in  the  place  of  unjuatly. 

*  ^'^  Proximo  miniJraniis     in  Roll  No.  997. 

^  The  roll  has  "  A  It  em.'''     1  cannot  tay  whether  AWtrkus^  AlUriut,  or  Albrttiut 
is  meant.     I  think  the  first. 

*  That  is,  di»patcs  or  denies. 


376  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


or  muniment  (instrufnentum  vel  manufnentuni)  relating  to  the 
said  agreement,  says  no,  but  he  fully  defends  that  the  ancestors 
of  William  fitz  Payn  ever  presented  to  the  said  church,  except 
alternately  when  it  was  vacant,  and  he  fully  defends  that  William 
son  of  John,  grandfather  of  William  fitz  Payn,  ever  presented  the 
said  Master  Walter  or  the  said  Hubert  his  son,  for,  he  says,  that 
one  Alice,  grandmother  of  Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is  in  his  custody, 
presented  Master  Walter;  and  afteru'ards  Roger  de  Vilers,  father 
of  the  said  Roger,  [presented]  the  said  Hubert  son  of  Master 
Walter,  and  that  on  their  presentations  they  were  admitted  and 
instituted.  And  because  Peter  docs  not  deny  that  the  ancestor 
of  the  said  William  fitz  Payn  last  presented  to  the  said  church, 
and  afterwards  confessed  that  the  ancestors  of  Roger  de  Vilers 
twice  presented  their  clerks  successively  to  the  church,  so  that  by 
this  the  said  agreement,  if  it  were  ever  made,  was  annulled,  or, 
for  the  same  reason,  the  said  William  fitz  Payn,  who  is  in  the 
custody  of  Robert  de  Gurnay^  should  present  twice  to  the  same 
church,  it  is  considered  that  the  advowson  should  remain  for  the 
present  to  William,  saving  the  right  of  Roger  de  Vilers,  who  is  in 
Peter's  custody,  when  he  should  come  of  age.  And  because  the 
said  William  Agullun  and  Isabella  can  claim  no  right  in  the 
advowson  unless  in  the  name  of  the  dower  of  Isabella,  whereof 
Roger  de  Vilers,  formerly  her  husband,  endowed  her  on  the  day 
he  married  her,  and  it  is  proved  that  Roger,  when  he  married 
her,  was  not  in  seisin  of  the  said  advowson  nor  did  the  same 
advowson  then  belong  to  him,  it  is  considered  that  William  and 
Isabella  can  claim  nothing  in  the  advowson,  and  that  they,  as 
well  as  Peter,  are  in  mercy.  Let  Robert  have  a  writ  to  the 
Bishop  of  Bath  that  he  should  admit  a  fit  person,  notwith- 
standing their  objection  to  his  [Robert's]  presentation,  etc.* 

Memb.  19. 

1385.  A  day  is  given  to  John  Ic  Rus,  claimant,  and  Robert 
de  Columbariis  on  a  plea  of  land  on  Friday  next  after  one  month 
from  Easter  on  the  prayer  of  the  parties,  and  so  from  day  to  day 
{ut  de  die  in  dievi).  Robert  has  promised  that  he  will  come  on 
that  day  in  person,  or  by  an  attorney,  to  do  and  receive  what 
right  shall  dictate,  and  he  grants  that  if  he  do  not  come  as 
aforesaid,  John  may  recover  his  seisin.* 

»  See  No.  1377.         '  See  Nos.  1337,  1344,  1347,  1376,  1391,  1395. 


SOMERSETSIIIRK   PLEAS.  377 


Mentb.  20. 

1386.  Geoffry  de  Mandehull,  by  his  attorney,  offered  himself 
on  the  fourth  day  against  Thomas  le  Bretun  on  a  plea  that  he 
should  observe  to  him  a  covenant  between  them  concerning  two 
knights'  fees,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Cherleton  of  Henry  son 
of  Richard,  and  of  William  son  of  Adam,  etc.  Thomas  did  not 
come,  and  he  was  attached  by  William  son  of  Adam  and  William 
de  Weir.  Therefore  let  him  be  put  under  better  pledges  to  be 
at  Westminster  on  the  quindene  of  St.  Michael.  And  the  first, 
etc* 

Memb,  23. 

1387.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  Geoffry  de  Bovenay, 
by  her  attorney,  seeks  against  the  Prior  of  Bradevestok**  one- 
third  part  of  one  carucate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Stoke  Curcy,  which  she  claims  in  dower  against  him,  etc.  And 
the  Prior,  by  his  attorney,  and  by  licence,  gives  up  to  her  the 
dower.     Let  her  have  her  seisin. 

1388.  Isabella,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Adam, 
seeks  against  William  son  of  William*  one-third  part  of  one 
carucate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  and  one  salt-pan 
{saline\  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Estcherleton* ;  and  against 
Margery  de  Ivethom  one-third  part  of  one  virgate  of  land 
and  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  [vill].* 
William  and  Margery  come  and  vouch  to  warranty  Adam  son 
of  William.  Let  them  have  him  on  the  next  coming  of  the 
justices  by  help  of  the  court,  etc® 

Memb,  24//. 

1389.  Emma,  formerly  the  wife  of  Philip  de  WVth,  seeks' 
against  Alan  de  Furneir  one-third  part  of  half  a  virgate  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  W'rth  as  her  dower,  and  whereof  the 

^  See  No.  1375.  Geoffry  came  to  Westminster  on  this  day,  but  Thomas  again 
made  default.  He  was  ordered  to  be  attached  to  attend  on  the  quindene  of  Hilary. 
See  Cur.  Keg^s  Roll,  No.  135,  Memb.  8d.  The  duplicate  roll.  No.  136,  says  in  three 
weeks  after  Hilary,  Memb.  11. 

*  In  Roll  Na  997  this  is  **  Brademerstok,"  and  Stoke  Curcy  is  •*Tokcurcy.** 

'  So  in  the  original.  In  No.  1390  the  name  is  g^ven  as  **  William  son  of 
Adam." 

*  Charlton  Adam.  '  Roll  No.  997  adds  "as  her  dower,  etc." 

*  See  No.  139a  '  See  No.  1373. 

3  c 


378  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


said  Philip,  formerly  her  husband,  endowed  her  at  the  door  of 
the  church  on  the  day  when  he  married  her,  etc.  Alan  comes, 
and  says  that  Emma  ought  not  to  have  dower  thereout  because, 
he  says,  Philip,  formerly  her  husband,  was  a  villein  and  held  his 
land  of  him  [Alan]  in  villeinage,  and  therein  he  puts  himself  upon 
the  country,  and  Emma  does  likewise.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is 
ordered  that  he  should  cause  to  come  before  him  twelve,  as  well 
knights,  etc.,  by  whom,  etc.,  and  who,  etc.,  and  by  their,  etc., 
diligently  inquire  whether  the  said  Philip,  formerly  husband  of 
Emma,  was  a  villein  and  held  the  said  land  in  villeinage,  as  Alan 
says,  or  not ;  that  he  should  make  known  the  inquest  to  the 
justices  at  the  first  assize  when  they  should  come  into  those 
parts,  etc.* 

Memb.  26. 

1390.  Isabella,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Adam, 
seeks  against  William  son  of  Adam*  one-third  part  of  five 
virgates  of  land  and  two  acres  of  willow  land  {terre  de  saucetd)^ 
with  the  appurtenances,  in  Estcherton'*  and  against  Thomas 
de  Perham  one-third  part  of  three  virgates  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill  as  her  dower,  etc.  William  and 
Thomas  come,  and  William  vouches  to  warranty  William  the 
elder.  Let  him  have  him  on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices  by 
help  of  the  court.  Thomas  comes,  and  as  to  two  virgates  of 
land  he  seeks  a  view.  Let  him  have  it.  A  day  is  given  them 
on  the  next  coming  of  the  justices,  and  in  the  meantime,  etc. 
And  as  to  one  virgate  of  land  he  says  that  he  does  not  hold 
it  otherwise  than  for  a  term  of  twelve  years,  and  he  vouches  to 
warranty  in  respect  of  it  Adam  son  of  William.  Let  him  have 
him  at  the  same  time  by  the  help  of  the  court* 

Memb.  26d. 

Continuation  of  the  month,  quindene,  and  of  the  morrow  of  the 
Ascension. 

1 391.  A  day  is  given  to  John  le  Rus,  claimant,  and  Robert 
de  Columbariis  to  hear  their  judgment  on  a  plea  of  land,  on  the 

*  Roll  No.  997  adds  that  Emma  puts  in  her  place  William  de  W'rthe  her  son. 
2  See  No.  1388.     In  Roll  No.  997  "  William  son  of  William  the  younger"  occurs 
in  this  place.  '*  See  Ducange,  Gloss.  **  Saiceda  "  {salicium), 

^  **  Estcherlton"  in  Roll  No.  997. 
Roll  No.  997  adds  *'  Let  him  be  summoned  in  the  county  of  Dorset." 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


morrow  of  Trinity  at  Wylton",  for  the  judgment  has  not  yet  been 
made,  etc.^ 

Memb.  27. 
1392.  Matthew,  Archdeacon  of  Buckingham,  wai  attached 
to  answer  William  de  Englefeud  on  a  plea  why  he  prosecuted  a 
plea  in  court  christian  concerning  the  advowson  of  the  chapel  of 
Laddingham,'  contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc.,  and  whereon 
William  complains  that  the  Archdeacon  sued  him  {mm  traxit  in 
placilutn')  in  court  christian  concerning  the  said  advowson, 
before  the  Prior  of  Bath,  by  authority  of  letters  of  our  lord  the 
Pope  (alitor  lidrh  rfwi/r/c)  after  ho,  [William],  had  brought  the 
prohibition  of  our  lord  the  King  that  he  [the  Archdeacon] 
should  not  proceed  in  the  said  court ;  wherefore,  he  says,  he  is 
injured,  and  has  [suffered]  damage  to  the  value  of  40  marks,and 
thereof  he  produces  suit,  etc.  The  Archdeacon  comes  and 
defends  the  force  and  injury,  etc.,  and  fully  defends  that  he  ever 
sued  a  plea  concerning  the  advowson  of  the  said  chapel,  because, 
he  says,  that  there  is  no  such  advowson,  for,  he  says,  all  tithes 
and  oblations  of  the  said  chajjel  belong  to  his  church  of  Buking- 
ham,  so  that  he  is  in  seisin  of  the  said  tithes  and  oblations  as 
belonging  to  his  church.  William  says  that  there  is  there  a 
chapel,  and  that  the  advowson  of  the  chapel,  with  ail  tithes  and 
offerings  {obvendonibus)  of  the  vill  of  Ledingburg,  belong  to  the 
church  of  Hachecotc,'  of  which  he  is  the  patron  {unde  ipse  est 
advocatus),  so  that  all  his  ancestors  have  presented  all  their 
clerks  to  the  said  church  and  likewise  lo  the  said  chapel,  and 
they  were  always  in  possession  of  all  the  tithes  and  offerings  of 
the  said  chapel  as  belonging  to  the  said  church  of  Achecote. 
He  says  that  he  first  presented  one  Robert  le  Butiller  to  the  said 
church  of  Achecote  and  likewise  to  the  said  chapel  of  Lcding- 
burgh',  so  that  the  same  Robert  was  admitted  and  instituted  upon 
his  presentation  as  well  to  the  church  as  to  the  chapel,  and  [was] 
in  full  possession  of  all  tithes  and  offerings  belonging  to  the  said 
chapel  for  one  year  and  more  until  the  Archdeacon  impleaded 
his  [William's]  said  clerk  in  court  christian  before  tlie  said 
Prior  concerning  the  said  tithes,  and  that  this  is  so  he  puts  him- 

'  See  No,  1395. 


38o  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


self  upon  the  country,  and  the  Archdeacon  likewise.  Therefore 
the  sheriff  is  ordered  that  in  three  weeks  after  Michaelmas  he 
should  cause  twelve,  whether  knights,  etc,  to  come  to  West- 
minster, by  whom,  etc.,  and  who,  etc,  to  recognise,  etc,  whether 
the  advowson  of  the  said  chapel  belongs  to  William,  [and 
whether]  all  William's  ancestors  have  presented  to  the  said 
chapel  [clerks],  who,  upon  their  presentation,  were  admitted  and 
instituted  to  the  same,  [and  whether]  they  took  all  tithes  and 
offerings  of  the  vill  of  Ledinglegh  (sic)  as  belonging  to  the  said 
chapel,  and  whether  William  presented  the  said  Robert  le  Butiller, 
his  clerk,  to  the  chapel,  who,  upon  such  presentation,  was  admitted 
and  instituted,  so  that  the  same  Robert  was  in  full  possession  of 
all  the  said  tithes  and  offerings  for  one  year,  as  William  says, 
or  whether  the  chapel  belongs  to  the  church  of  the  Archdeacon 
of  Buckingham,  so  that  the  Archdeacon  and  all  his  predecessors, 
parsons  of  the  church  of  Buckingham,  were  always  accustomed 
to  take  all  tithes  and  offerings  of  the  vill  of  Ledingburgh  as 
belonging  to  his  said  church  of  Buckingham  as  the  same  Arch- 
deacon says,  for  that  [the  parties]  have  put  themselves  upon  this 
inquest,  etc  {quia  tarn,  etc,^  et  concessu  est  huic  iH  etc.y 

Metnb,  2jd. 

1393.  Thomas  de  Pereton'  gives  i  mark  for  a  licence  to 
agree  with  Hugh  de  Dunepol  and  Margery  .  .  .  .  on  a  plea 
of  covenant,  by  pledge  of  Hugh  himself.* 

Meinb,  32. 

1394.  Robert  de  Valle  Torta,  Ralph  de  Valle  Torta,  Philip 
Lucyen,  Henry  de  Cadewell',*  and  John  de  Turbeviir  offered 
themselves  on  the  fourth  day  against  William  de  Valenc'  and 
Joan  his  wife,  Roger  de  Mortuo  Mari  and  Matilda  his  wife,  and 
Agatha  de  Ferariis  on  a  plea  that  they,  together  with  R.  de  Clare, 
Earl  of  Gloucester,  R.  le  Bigot,  Earl  Marshal,  William  de 
Cantilupo  the  younger  and  Eva  his  wife,  Humphrey  de  Boun 
and  Alienora  his  wife,  William  de  Vescy  and  Agnes  his  wife, 
William  de  Vallibus  and  Alienora  his  wife,  Franco  de  Boun  and 
Sybil  his  wife,  Reginald  de  Moun  and  Isabella  his  wife,  John  de 
Moun  and  Joan  his  wife,  and  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of  Simon 

*  See  Bract.,  fo.  397. 

'  .See  No.  1374.     The  lerms  of  the  compromise  are  set  out  in  **  Som.  Fines," 
p.  147,  No.  71.  3  "Kadcwelly"  in  Roll  No.  997. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


de  Kyma,  should  warrant  the  said  Robert  one-third  part  of  ten 
librates*  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Henneye,  in  the 
county  of  Berks,  and  that  they  should  warrant  the  said  Ralph 
one-third  part  of  £(i  8j.  fid.  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Horsette.  in  the  county  of  Cambridge,  and  that  they  should 
warrant  the  said  Philip  one-third  part  of  £\0  of  rent,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  hundred  of  Cokdon,  in  the  county  of  Dorset, 
and  that  they  should  warrant  the  said  Henry  one-third  part  of 
6j.  td.  of  rent,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Bosehara,  in  the  county 
of  Sussex,  and  that  they  should  warrant  the  said  John  one-third 
part  of  :£26  i&j.  "jd.  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Bcrc  and 
Cumbe,  in  the  county  of  Dorset,  which  third  parts  Margaret, 
Countess  of  Lincoln,  claims  in  dower  against  them,  and  in 
respect  of  which  the  said  Robert  and  the  others  have  vouched 
the  said  William  and  the  others,  together  with  the  said  R.  de 
Clare,  Earl  of  Gloucester,  and  the  others  to  warranty  against 
her.  They  did  not  come,  and  they  had  a  day  in  banco  to  this 
day,  to  wit.  the  quindcne  of  Easter,  after  they  had  appeared  in 
court  at  Lewes,"  and  sought  a  day  by  prayer  of  the  parties 
(habuerunl  dUm  in  Banco  ad  hunc  diem  scilicet  die  Paschie  in  at 
dies  postquam  comparaverunt  in  curiam  apud  Lewes  eC  petieninl 
diem prece parciuiti).  Judgment :  take  into  the  hand  of  our  lord 
the  King  land  of  the  said  William  de  Valcnc'  and  Joan  his  wife, 
in  the  county  of  Hereford,  to  the  value,  etc.,  which  is  valued  at 
6Qf.  If/,;*  land  of  the  said  Roger  de  Mortuo  Mari  and  Matilda 
his  wife,  in  the  county  of  Somerset,  to  the  value,  etc.,  which  is 
valued  at  23J.  10^*/.,'  and  let  them  be  summoned  that  they  be  at 
Westminster  on  the  octave  of  St.  Michael  to  hear  their  judg- 
ment. And  touching  the  said  Agatha,  who  is  in  the  custody  of 
our  lord  the  King,  the  King  must  be  consulted,  for  she  is  under 
age  and  in  custody-  The  same  day  is  given  to  R.  de  Clare, 
Earl  of  Gloucester,  and  all  the  other  parties  with  him  by  their 
attorneys  in  banco. 

1395.  Our  lord  the  King  has  commanded  the  justices  that 
they  should  send  the  record  of  the  suit  which  is  before  them  by 
writ  of  right  between  John  le  Rus.  claimant,  and  Robert  de 
Columbariis,  tenant,  concerning  three  carucates  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in   Lamette,''  before  him  at  Westminster  on  the 

'  '■llli"liij"m  Roll  No.  997.     Inlhifltoll  "  lil.mj." 

'  "Welles"  in  KoU  No.  997.  '  "71..  W."  in  Koll  N-),  W7- 

•  "33*.  lojii."  in  Kull  Nu.  99;.  •  "  Laiuyete"  in  Roll  No,  997. 


382  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

quindene  of  St  Michael,  and  that  they  should  fix  for  the  parties 
the  same  day  that  they  be  there  to  hear  the  record  and  to 
receive  their  judgment,  etc.  And  the  same  day  is  gfiven  them 
according  to  the  said  precept  of  our  lord  the  King,  etc.* 


ROLL  Na  997.    (Wiltshire.) 

This  roll  is  the  record  of  the  forinsec  business  in  Wiltshire  on  the 
eyre  of  Henry  of  Bath  in  a.d.  1249.  The  Somerset  pleas,  etc.,  are 
almost  all  to  be  found  on  the  Hampshire  Roll  No.  777.  It  has  not 
been  necessary,  therefore,  to  do  more  than  refer  back  to  them  in  that 
place. 

Memb,  i. 

Pleas  of  divers  forinsec  counties  at  Wylton*  before  H[enry]  of 
Bath  and  his  companions,  justices,  on  the  quindene  of 
Easter,  in  the  thirty-third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry, 
son  of  King  John. 

1 396.  Robert  de  Valle  Torta,  Ralph  de  Valle  Torta,  Philip 
Lucyen,  Henry  de  Cadewely,  and  John  de  Turbeviir  offered 
themselves  on  the  fourth  day  against  William  de  Valenc*  and 
Joan  his  wife,  Roger  de  Mortuo  Mari  and  Matilda  his  wife,  etc. 
Be  it  remembered  that  this  suit  is  fully  inrolled  lower  in  the 
roll  in  the  fifth  week  [from]  Easter.  Therefore  let  it  there  be 
sought,  etc.* 

Memb.  id, 

1 397.  A  day  is  given  to  John  le  Rus,  claimant,  and  Robert  de 
Columbariis,  etc. 

This  entry  is  a  duplicate  of  that  on  Roll  No.  777.  See  No.  1385  ante.  It  is  not 
necessary,  therefore,  to  repeat  it. 

Memb,  2. 
1398. 

Here  is  recorded  the  suit  of  the  Prior  c  f  Taunton,  for  which  see  No.  1378.  The 
language  of  this  record  is  practically  identical  wiih  that  of  Roll  777. 

^  By  this  time  the  parties  seem  to  have  had  enough  of  litigation.  Before  the  day 
fixed  for  their  appearance  before  the  King  they  compromised  the  quarrel.  John  got 
his  land  and  more,  and  he  paid  Robert  /200.  See  '*  Som.  Fines,  p.  148,  No.  72. 
The  fine  was  levied  at  the  Strand  on  the  octave  of  St.  John,  33  Hen.  III.  See 
Nos.  1337.  1344.  i3«7»  1376,  1385.  1391. 

'  *'  Somerset  and  Hereford  "  in  the  margin. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  383 

Memb.  ^d. 

1 399.  The  Prior  of  Goldclive  was  summoned,  etc 

This  is  a  duplicate  record  of  No.  1380  in  Roll  No.  777. 

1400.  John  de  Pympe  on  Sunday  in  the  month  of  Easter 
sought  his  land  by  plevin,  which  [land]  was  taken  into  the  hand 
of  our  lord  the  King  for  the  default  which  [John]  made  against 
John  de  Staingreve.     Let  him  have  it,  etc. 

Memb,  6. 

1401.  Robert  de  Gumay  was  summoned,  etc. 

This  suit  relating  to  the  church  of  Sanford  will  be  found  under  No.  1383  ante, 

Memb,  7. 
Pleas  of  divers  counties  at  Wilton*  in  three  weeks  after  Easter. 

1402.  A  day  is  given  to  Geoffry  de  Welemerston,  etc. 

See  No.  1381  of  Roll.  No.  777,  where  this  entry  is  repeated. 

1403.  Robert  Ridel  seeks  against  Jordan  Ridel,  etc 

See  No.  1382  of  Roll  No.  777. 

Memb,  jd. 

Of  the  quindene  of  Easter  continued. 

1404.  Robert  de  Gumay,  William  Agyllun,  and  Isabella  his 
wife  were  summoned,  etc. 

See  No.  1384  in  Roll  No.  777. 

Memb,  8. 

Continuation  of  the  third  week  of  Easter. 

1405.  Geoffry  de  Maundevill  puts  in  his  place  Thomas  de 
Caylluel  against  Thomas  le  Breton*  on  a  plea  of  covenant  and 
on  a  plea  of  warranty  of  charter,  etc.* 

Memb,  13. 
Pleas  of  forinsec  counties  in  one  month  after  Easter. 

1406.  Matthew,  Archdeacon  of  Buckingham,  was  attached  to 
answer  William  de  Englefeld,  etc. 

For  this  suit  see  No.  1392  of  Roll  No.  777. 

t  <•  Dorset  and  Somerset "  in  the  margin. 


384  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Memb,  14. 
Continuation  of  the  month  and  fifth  week. 

1407.  Emma,  formerly  the  wife  of  Phih'p  de  W'rth,  seeks 
against  Alan  de  Fumell,  etc 

Sec  No.  1389  of  Roll  Na  777. 

Memb  14//. 

Continuation  of  the  month,  the  third  week,  the  quindene,  and  the 
fifth  week. 

1408.  Margery,  formerly  the  wife  of  GeofTry  de  Bovenay,  by 
her  attorney,  etc 

See  No.  1387  of  Roll  No.  777. 

Memb.  15. 
Continuation  of  the  month  of  Easter  and  of  the  fifth  week. 

1409.  Isabella^  formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Adam, 
seeks  against  William  son  of  William  the  younger,  etc 

See  No.  1390  in  Roll  No.  777. 

Memb.  16. 

Continuation  of  the  fifth  week  of  Elaster. 

141a  Isabella,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Adam, 
seeks  against  William  son  of  William  one-third  part,  etc 

See  No.  1387  in  Roll  No.  777. 

Memb.  17. 

Continuation  of  the  month,  fifth  week,  and  of  the  morrow  of  the 
Ascension. 

141 1.  A  day  is  given  to  John  le  Rus  and  Robert  de  Colum- 
bariis,  etc 

See  No.  1385  in  Roll  Na  777. 

Memb.  \Sd. 
Pleas  of  divers  counties  on  the  morrow  of  Trinity. 

141 2.  Our  lord  the  King  has  commanded  the  justices  that 
they  should  send  the  record  of  the  suit  which  is  before  them  by 
writ  of  right  between  John  le  Rus,  claimant,  and  Robert  de 
Columbariis,  etc 

See  No.  1395  in  RuU  Na  777. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  385 

Menib  19. 
Of  the  quindene  of  Easter. 

141 3.  Robert  de  Valle  Torta,  Ralph  de  Valle  Torta,  etc. 

See  No.  1394  in  Roll  No.  777. 

Memb.  25. 

Continuation  of  [essoins]  de  malo  veniendi  in  three  weeks  after 
Easter. 

1414.  Joan  wife  of  Peter  le  Rus^  against  Agnes,  formerly 
the  wife  of  Robert  le  Petit,  on  a  plea  of  dower,  by  Richard  le 
Deveneys.  On  the  next  coming  of  the  justices.  She  has  pledged 
her  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Peter,  husband  of  the  said 
Joan,  in  banco. 


ROLL  No.  177.    (Devonshire.) 

There  was  an  eyre  in  Devon  in  33  Henry  III.  Roger  de  Thurkelby 
presided.  He  sat  at  Exeter,  as  we  learn  from  the  feet  of  fines,  on  the 
octave  of  Trinity.  The  proceedings  of  the  shire  are  to  be  found 
recorded  on  Assize  Roll  No.  176.  Roll  No.  177  is  devoted  entirely  to 
pleas  of  other  counties.  It  consists  of  six  membranes  only.  They 
were  formerly  numbered  28  to  33  inclusive.  It  has  no  title  beyond  that 
on  memb.  i.  It  was  probably  at  one  time  part  of  Roll  176,  which, 
to  judge  from  alterations  in  the  numbering  of  its  membranes,  is  now 
six  less  than  it  was.  This  roll  therefore  dates  from  the  summer  of 
A.D.  1249. 

Memb,  i. 

Pleas  of  divers  counties  at  Exeter  in  the  county  of  Devon  [33 
Hen.,  before  Roger  de  Thurkelby  and  his  companions, 
justices,  in  the  thirty-third  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry, 
son  of  King  John].* 

141 5.  The  Prior  of  Montacute  offered  himself  on  the  fourth 
day  against  Andrew  de  Suleney  on  a  plea*  that  he  should  observe 
a  covenant  made  between  him,  the  Prior,  and  Ralph  de  Sullney, 

Over  her  name  is  written  ^^habet  virum,^'* 
'  The  part  within  brackets  is  in  later  handwriting,  apparently  that  of  Le  Neve. 
See  No.  1421. 

3  I> 


386  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

father  of  the  said  Andrew,  whose  heir,  etc.,  concerning  twenty 
acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Lanteglos  and  the 
advowson  of  the  church  of  the  same  vill.  Andrew  did  not  come, 
and  he  was  summoned,  etc.  He  made  more  defaults,  so  that  the 
sheriff  was  ordered  to  distrain  him  by  his  lands  and  chattels, 
and  that  he  [the  sheriff]  should  have  his  body  [here]  this  day, 
etc.,  and  the  sheriff  has  done  nothing  in  the  matter.  Therefore 
the  sheriff  of  Somerset  is  ordered,  as  before,  that  he  should  dis- 
train him  by  his  lands  and  chattels,  and  that  he  [the  sheriff] 
should  have  his  body  in  three  weeks  after  Trinity,  etc^ 

Memb,  3. 

14 1 6.  Christiana  Luvel,  by  her  attorney,  offered  herself  on  the 
fourth  day  against  Richard  Luvel  on  a  plea  that  he  should  pay 
her  100  marks  which  he  owes  her,  and  unjustly  detains,  etc. 
Richard  did  not  come,  etc.,  and  the  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he 
should  distrain  him  by  all  his  lands,  etc.,  so  that  [the  sheriff] 
should  have  his  body  [here]  this  day.  The  sheriff  did  nothing 
in  the  matter.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered,  as  before,  that 
he  should  distrain  him  by  all  his  lands,  etc.  So  that,  etc.,  until, 
etc.,  and  that  he  should  have  his  body  before  the  justices  at  the 
first  assize,  etc.,  and  let  the  sheriff  be  there  to  hear  his  judgment, 
etc. 

1 41 7.  The  same  Christiana,  by  her  attorney,  offered  herself 
on  the  fourth  day  against  the  said  Richard  on  a  plea  that  he 
should  observe  a  fine  levied  before  the  justices  at  Ivelcestr' 
between  Richard  Cotel  and  the  said  Christiana,  claimants,  and 
the  said  Richard,  tenant,  touching  Christiana's  dower  in  Kary, 
Wykalton,  and  Pydecumb',  with  the  appurtenances,  and  the 
advowson  of  the  church  of  Caure,  whereof  the  chirograph,  etc. 
Richard  did  not  come,  etc.  The  sheriff  was  ordered  that  he 
should  distrain  him  by  his  lands,  etc.,  so  that  he  should  have 
his  body  [here]  this  day,  and  the  sheriff  certified  the  distress. 
Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered,  as  before,  that  he  should  dis- 
train him  by  all  his  lands,  etc.,  so  that  he  [the  sheriff]  should 
have  his  body  at  the  time  aforesaid,  etc' 

*  As  no  other  place  is  named,  presumably  Andrew  is  to  be  at  Exeter.  In  the 
margin  is  +,  the  short  form  of  est^  to  which  reference  has  been  made  previously.  It 
occurs  also  against  Nos.  1416,  1417,  and  1421. 

"^  In  the  margin  **  At  th^  n^xt  coming  of  the  justices." 


S03«ERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  387 

1418.  Walter,  Archdeacon  of  Tanton',  was  attached  to  answer 
Ranulf  de  Flury  on  a  plea  why  he  [the  Archdeacon]  held  plea  in 
court  christian  touching  chattels  which  were  not  testamentary, 
etc.,  contrary,  etc.,  and  whereon  Ranulf  says  that  while  he  pro- 
duced to  him  [the  Archdeacon]  on  the  morrow  of  the  Apostles 
Simon  and  Judc  in  the  church  of  St.  Mary  Magdalen  at  Tanton', 
in  the  beginning  of  the  thirty-third  year,  the  royal  prohibition 
lest  he  [the  Archdeacon]  should  hold  the  plea  in  court  christian 
touching  chattels,  etc.,  the  same  Archdeacon,  in  contempt  of  the 
said  prohibition,  nevertheless  held  such  plea,  exacting  from  him 
I  mark,  and  excommunicated  him  contrary,  etc.,  wherefore  he 
says,  that  because  he  held  tliat  plea  contrary,  etc.,  he,  Ranulf,  is 
injured,  and  has  [incurred]  damage  to  the  value  of  locu.  The 
Archdeacon  comes  and  defends  the  force  and  injury,  etc.,  and 
says  that  he  never  impleaded  him  [Ranulf  ]  (««w(?KflW  itttplacitavit 
turn)  touching  any  chattels  contrary  to  the  prohibition,  etc.,  but 
he  says  that  in  truth  Ranulf  was  impleaded  before  him  [the 
Archdeacon]  concerning  certain  tithes,  and  therefor  made  fine 
with  the  said  Archdeacon  for  i  mark,  etc. ;  and  because  Ranulf 
cannot  contradict  this,  and  moreover  has  not  produced  sufficient 
suit  against  him  [the  Archdeacon]  that  he  held  plea  contrary, 
etc.,  it  is  considered  that  the  Archdeacon  [may  go]  without  a  day, 
and  Ranulf  is  in  mercy,  by  pledge  of  HamcUn  de  Deandon, 

141Q.  Andrew  VVak'  is  in  mercy  for  his  great  transgression, 
and  is  amerced  in  10  marks.' 

1420.  Hugh  de  Cardigan  and  Amice  his  wife  put  in  their 
place  Roger  de  Kardewurth',  or  Thomas  de  Trom,  against 
Robert  de  Clavinc  on  a  pica  of  assize  of  novel  disseisin,  whereon 
it  is  complained * 

Memb.  6. 
1431,  The  Prior  of  Montacute,  by  his  attorney,  offered  himself 
on  the  fourth  day  against  Andrew  de  Suleny  on  a  plea"  that  he 
should  observe  a  covenant  made  between  him,  the  Prior,  and 
Ralph  de  Sulcni,  father  of  the  said  Andrew,  whose  heir  he  is, 
concerning  30  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Lanteglos, 
in  the  county  of  Cornwall,  and  concerning  the  advowson  of  the 
church  of  the  same  vill,  etc.     Andrew  did  not  come,  and  the 

'  The  entry  had  originally  »o  mifUs,  but  il  has  been  altered  to  10.     One  Anilrew 
Wake  woi  shcriH  uf  Somerset  in  52  and  53  Hen.  IIL 

*  The  tnlty  concludes  thus.  '  See  No.  1415.     *'+"  in  the  margin. 


388  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  distrain  him  by  all  his  lands 
and  chattels,  etc.  The  sheriff  certified  that  he  [Andrew]  was 
distrained,  etc.  Therefore  the  sheriff  is  ordered,  as  before,  that 
he  should  distrain  him  by  all  his  lands,  etc.,  so  that,  etc.,  until, 
etc.,  and  that  he  [the  sheriff]  should  have  his  body  before  our 
justices  itinerant  at  Ivelcestr'  on  the  octave  of  St  John  the 
Baptist     Let  him  be  distrained  in  the  county  of  Somerset 


ROLL  No.  1 178.    (Divers  Counties.) 

This  roll  is  devoted  to  pleas  of  the  lesser  assizes  taken  before  the 
King's  justice,  Henry  de  Bracton,  with  whom  were  associated  the  several 
knights  whose  names  are  given  below.  The  counties  included  in  the 
roll  are  Somerset,  Devon,  Wilts,  and  Dorset.  The  Somerset  pleas 
alone  are  here  given.  The  dates  given  by  the  various  headings  cover — 
first,  the  period  between  April  and  November,  35  and  36  Hen.  III., 
A.D.  1251 ;  next,  the  period  between  August  and  November,  37  and  38 
Hen.  III.,  A.D.  1253.  In  addition,  there  seem  to  be  a  few  pleas  ot 
the  month  of  April,  41  Hen.  III.,  a,d.  1257. 

Meinb.  2. 

1422.  Walerand  de  Welleleg'  puts  in  his  place  William  de 
Weleslegh,  or  Adam  de  Compt',  against  Walter  le  Bruen  on  a 
plea  of  assize  of  novel  disseisin  and  on  a  plea  why  he  obstructed 
a  certain  way,  and  concerning  common  of  pasture  in  Dultingcot, 
etc.^ 

Memb.  id. 

Assizes  of  novel  disseisin  taken  at  Melverton  on  Friday  next 
before  the  feast  of  St  George,  in  the  thirty-fifth  year,  by 
order  of  our  lord  the  King,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton,  Henry 
de  Stawell,  and  Roges  son  of  Simon,  his  companions,  etc. 

1423.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Ripariis,  Thomas  de  Ho,  Richard  Vicar  of  Wineford,  Adam  in 
the  Tone,  Sampson  Attehalse,  John  Brun  of  Widecumb*,  Robert 
de  Holenham,  and  William  de  le  Poer  unjustly,  etc.  disseised 
William  de  Polhamford*  of  his  free  tenement  in  Loscumb',  since 
the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  the  said  William 

^  See  No.  1426. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


and  the  others  disseised  him  of  about  one  hundred  acres  of  land, 
with  the  appurtenances.  William  does  not  come,  but  his  bailifT 
comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because 
no  ancestor  of  William  was  seised  thereof,  nor  [ivas]  this  William, 
nor  [were]  his  men  otherwise  than  for  money  which  at  one  time 
they  gave  to  the  said  William  and  his  bailiffs  for  furz.e  (/a/inis) 
and  herbage,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.' 
William  de  Polhamford'  comes,  and  says  that  the  tenement, 
concerning  which  complaint  is  made,  he  had  of  the  inheritance 
of  William  de  PoIham[ford]  his  father,  who  enfeoffed  him  thereof, 
and  when  he  was  under  age  he  was  in  the  custody  of  the  Prior 
of  Tanton'  as  chief  lord  of  the  fee,  and  the  Prior,  in  the  name 
of  the  said  William,  took  all  profits  of  the  tenement,  as  herbage 
and  other  things,  and  he,  William,  aftenvards  [did]  likewise  with- 
out dispute  until  William  de  Rypariis  and  the  others,  in  the  year 
last  past,  unjustly  disseised  him.  And  thereon  he  puts  himselt 
upon  the  assize.  The  Jurors  say  that  the  tenement,  of  which  a 
view  was  made,  belongs  to  Loscumb'  and  not  to  Wyncford', 
and  that  the  said  William  de  Rypar'  and  William  de  Polamford' 
and  their  men  have  taken  and  carried  off  crops  from  the  said 
tenement,  such  as  furze  and  other  things.  Questioned  who  had 
the  greater  right  to  take  crops  from  the  tenement,  they  say 
positively  William  de  Polhamford'  and  not  William  de  Rjpariis, 
and  that  the  men  of  William  dc  Ripariis  unjustly  disseised  him^ 
as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William  de 
Polhamford'  should  recover  his  seisin  by  view  of  the  jurors. 
And  the  men  of  William  de  Ripariis  are  in  mercy.     Damages, 

20s. 

1424.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  Saphin 
unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Goldeburg  de  Wolfarston'  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Wolfarston,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is 
complained  that  he  disseised  him  of  seven  acres  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances.  Afterwards  John  [came]  and  confessed  the 
disseisin  ;  therefore  let  him  be  in  custody.  [His]  amercement 
is  pardoned  by  the  King,  because  he  is  poor.  And  it  is  agreed 
between  them  that  the  said  John  should  restore  to  Goldeburg  his 
seisin,  and  he  gives  John  ^  mark. 

1425.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Roger  de 
Burton',  Robert  Cotel',  Robert  de  Wytherton',  John  de  Braden- 
esse,  and  Thomas  de  Mere  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Sybil  de 

'  Here  Ihere  Ui  maipnal  note,  "  vatat  quia  aliii."    S«e  No.  1427. 


390  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Hethcumb  of  her  free  tenement  in  Hethcumbe,  since  the  first, 
etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  her  of 
one  messuage  and  a  certain  culture  called  Wodecroft,  with  the 
appurtenances.  Roger  and  the  others  do  not  come ;  therefore 
let  the  assize  proceed  in  default.  The  jurors  say  that  the  said 
Roger  and  the  others  did  disseise  the  said  Sybil,  as  the  writ  says, 
etc.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  she  should  recover  her 
seisin,  and  Roger  and  the  others  are  in  mercy.  Damages, 
I  mark. 

Memb.  2d. 

1426.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Walter  le 
Brun  unjustly,  etc  obstructed  a  certain  way  in  Dunticot  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Wallerand*  de  Wellesl'  in  the 
same  vill,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that 
he  obstructed  that  way  for  about  eight  feet,  etc.  Walter  comes 
and  says  that  he  has  not  obstructed  the  way,  but  that  he  has 
enlarged  it  ....  ,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize. 

The  same  assize,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to  recognise 
whether  the  said  Walter  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  the  said  Walter 
(should  be  Walerand)  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Duntincot' 
which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill,  since  the 
first,  etc.,  and  whereon  he  complains  that  while  he  and  his  men 
villeins,  always  were  wont  to  have  common  there  .  •  .  . 
[after  the]  crops  were  taken  off,  and  whilst  the  land  lay  fallow 
{ad  warett),  the  same  Walter  inclosed  the  land  so  that  neither 
Walerand  nor  his  men  could  go  upon  the  land  and  use  the 
common  as  they  were  wont  [to  do].  Walter  comes,  and  says 
that  neither  the  said  Walerand  nor  his  men  [had]  any  common 
.     .     .     ,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 

The  same  assize,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to  recog- 
nise whether  the  said  Walter  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  the  said 
Walerand'  of  his  free  tenement  in  Duntincot,^  since  the  first,  etc., 
and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  [Walter]  disseised  him  of 
two  parts  of  Afid.  of  annual  rent  issuing  from  a  certain  mill 
of  Walter,  and  which  he  [Wallerand]  was  wont  to  receive  for  a 
certain  water-course  which  the  same  Walter  and  his  predecessors 
have  had  over  {ultra)  the  land  of  Walerand.     Walter  comes,  and 

Dulcot  near  Wells. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  39I 


says  that  he  many  times  {inultoties)  offered  him  the  said  rent, 
and  he  [Walerand]  .  .  .  [would  not]  receive  it.  Walerand 
says  that  Walter  never  offered  the  .  .  •  [rent]  prior  to  the 
seeking  of  the  writ  but  after,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon 
the  assize. 

The  jurors  say  that  Walerand  and  his  men  have  always 
enjoyed  {usi)  the  said  ....  [common],  and  therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Walerand  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Walter 
is  in  mercy.  Damages,  4$".  They  say  also,  touching  the 
aforesaid  tenement,  that  Walter  did  disseise  him  of  two  parts 
of  4Ck/.  .  .  .  which  the  said  Walerand  was  accustomed  to 
receive  for  a  certain  mill  in  Duntincot  .  .  .  [for  that  before] 
the  seeking  of  the  writ  Walter  would  not  pay  the  rent,  but 
always  refused  to  pay  it.  .  .  .  [Therefore  it]  is  [considered] 
that  Walerand  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Walter  is  in  mercy. 
Damages,  4^.  ^d.  Concerning  the  way,  they  say  that  Walter  did 
obstruct  the  said  way  by  a  certain  wall  which  he  raised.  There- 
fore it  is  considered  that  the  nuisance  should  be  suppressed 
{nocum'  deponator)  by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  that  [the  way] 
should  be  as  it  was  wont  and  ought  to  be,  and  Wsdter  is  in 
mercy.    Damages,  \2d, 

Menib.  3. 

Assizes  of  novel  disseisin  taken  at  Milverton  on  Friday  next 
before  the  feast  of  St.  George,  in  the  thirty-fifth  year,  by 
order  of  our  lord  the  King,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton  and 
his  companions  Henry  de  Stawell  and  Roges  son  of  Simon. 

1427.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Ripariis,  Thomas  de  Ho,  Richard  vicar  of  Wynesford*,  Adam  in 
the  Ton',  Sampson  Athalse,  John  Brun  of  Wydecumb,  Robert  de 
Holenham,  and  William  le  Peer  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  William 
de  Polhamford'  of  his  free  tenement  in  Loscumb',  since  the  first, 
etc.,  and  whereon  the  said  William  de  Polhamford  complains 
that  they  disseised  him  of  his  tenement,  to  wit,  of  a  certain 
waste  (vastd)  of  about  one  hundred  acres,  and  of  a  certain 
meadow  of  which  William  Do  enfeoffed  William  de  Polhamford 
his  father,  and  of  a  certain  meadow  of  which  one  Laurence, 
brother  of  William  Do,  enfeoffed  the  same,  so  that  William  his 
father  was  in  seisin  thereof,  and  depastured  {pavit)  the  herbage 
with  his  cattle  and  likewise  the  waste,  and  carried  off  furze 


392  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

without  dispute  or  any  other  hindrance,  and  he  died  seised 
thereof,  and  after  his  death  the  same  seisin  was  with  his  [WiUiam 
the  son's]  guardian  while  he  was  under  age,  and  with  him  when 
he  became  of  full  age  and  had  seisin  of  his  lands,  and  thus  he 
was  in  seisin  thereof  without  any  hindrance  until  the  same 
William  de  Rypariis  and  his  baliffs  let  that  land  to  their  men  to 
till  it  and  to  cut  wood  {faciend*  baticiu)^  and  until  they  so 
disseised  him,  and  that  the  tenement  belongs  to  Loscumb*  and 
not  to  Wynesford,  which  are  different  fees  and  different 
baronies,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  jury.  William 
de  Ripariis  does  not  come,  but  his  bailiff,  to  wit,  Thomas  de 
Ho,  and  the  others,  [come]  and  say  that  the  assize  ought  not 
to  be  made  because  that  tenement,  of  which  a  view  has  been 
made,  is  the  tenement  of  William  de  Ripariis,  and  is  not,  nor 
ever  was,  of  William  de  Polhamford  ;  nor  was  the  said  William 
Do  seised  thereof  so  that  he  might  enfeoff  anyone  thereof ;  nor 
was  William,  the  father  of  this  William,  ever  enfeoffed  thereof; 
nor  had  that  William  any  seisin  thereof;  nor  [had]  William  his 
son,  for  when  they  came  upon  the  land  with  their  cattle  they 
[William  de  Ripariis  and  his  men]  took  the  cattle  so  that 
they,  William  and  William,  made  fine  for  their  cattle,  sometimes 
for  more,  sometimes  for  less,  at  the  will  of  William  de  Rypariis  ; 
and  when  they  [William  and  William]  cut  furze  they  [William 
de  Ripariis,  etc.],  put  them  under  pledges  {devadiaverunt  cos)} 
Touching  the  meadow,  they  say  that  because  a  certain  villein  of 
William  enclosed  a  part  of  that  meadow  they  took  his  cattle, 
so  that  he  made  fine  for  lOJ.  for  the  trespass  ;  and  that  the 
tenement  belongs  to  Wynesford  and  not  to  Loscumb  he  {sic) 
puts  himself  upon  the  jury.  William  de  Polhamford  comes,  and 
says  that  neither  his  cattle  nor  those  of  his  father  were  taken  on 
that  tenement,  nor  were  they  [William  and  his  father]  put  under 
pledges  (nee  fuerunt  devadiatt)  for  [cutting]  furze,  but  this  hap- 
pened  on   another  tenement  concerning  which   he  makes  no 

*  Basticium  =  sylva  ca'dua^  Gall,  taillis,     Ducange,  Gloss. 

'  As  Bracton  poinUt  out,  every  disseisin  is  a  trespass,  but  every  trespass  is  not 
necessarily  a  disseisin.  After  discussing  trespass  without  intention  of  acquiring  seisin, 
which,  if  disputed,  must  be  determined  by  inquest,  the  assize  being  converted  into  a 
jury  for  the  purpose,  he  says  :**-£"/  quid  si  talis  in  alieno  ita  jus  sibi  usurpcevit?  Vel 
prostemendo  arbores  vel  succidcndo  vel  lapides  finales  amovendo  ut  predictum  est. 
Imprimis  ante  assisam  capienda  sunt  vadia  ( si  fieri  possit )  et  ita  emendabitur  tratts- 
gressio  per  captioncm  vadiorum  et  si  se  devadiari  non  permiserit,  recurrendum  est  ad 
breve  de  nova  disseysitia  et  cadit  assisa  injuratam  et  duplicabitur  pena  transgressumis 
vel  donee  sciatur  utrum  quis  clamaverit  vel  non^^  ff,  216b  and  217. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


393 


claim  and  which  is  of  another  barony  and  another  fee,  to  wit, 
of  Wynesford,  where  beasts  were  taken,  and  not  on  this  tenement 
of  which  the  view  was  made. 

The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  tenement  was  of  the 
said  William  Do,  and  that  he  gave  it  to  the  said  William  de 
Polhamford.  and  the  same  William  was  in  seisin  thereof,  and 
died  seised,  and  the  guardian  of  his  son,  after  him,  in  the  name 
of  the  son  and  heir  and  the  said  William  the  son,  who  comes, 
when  he  came  to  full  age  likewise,  so  that  they  depastured  the 
herbage  and  carried  off  the  furze  from  the  tenement  without  any 
hindrance  by  that  gift;  but  in  truth  there  was  always  a  dispute 
between  William  de  Rypariis  and  the  aforesaid  lords  of  Losham 
because  he  caused  some  furze  to  be  carried  off  by  his  men  and 
depastured  the  herbage.  Asked  whether  Wynesford  and  Los- 
ham be  of  one  and  the  same  barony  and  of  one  fee,  they  say  no, 
but  of  different  Asked  to  what  fee  the  tenement  of  which  the 
view  was  made  belonged,  whether  to  Wynesford  or  to  Losham, 
they  say  to  Losham  and  not  to  Wynesford.  Asked,  seeing  that 
each  of  them  depastured  the  herbage  and  carried  off  furze,  which 
of  them  did  this  justly  and  which  unjustly,  when  both  could  not 
have  that  tenement  nor  be  in  seisin  thereof  as  of  a  free  tenement 
together  and  at  the  same  time,  they  say  that  it  seems  to  ihem 
that  the  said  William  de  I'olhamford  did  tliis  justly  because  the 
tenement  is  his,  and  that  the  said  William  de  Rypariis  did  it 
unjustly  because  he  has  no  right  in  the  tenement  nor  any  seisin 
otherwise  than  by  force  and  his  power ;  and  because  he  has  ro 
right  in  that  tenement  nor  rightful  seisin  he  acted  unjustly  in 
tilling  and  cropping  the  land,  and  wherefore  it  seems  to  them 
that,  inasmuch  as  that  tenement  is  of  the  said  William  de  Pol- 
hamford, so  his  use  and  seisin  of  the  tenement  is  his  own,  and 
that  by  such  use  he  should  retain  his  tenement ;  and  that 
William  de  Ripariis  could  acquire  nothing  for  himself  by  such 
use  in  the  tenement  of  another ;  that  the  tenement  does  not 
belong  to  the  fee  of  Wynesford'  which  he,  William  de  Ripariis 
holds  ;  nor  is  it  othenvise  shown  by  the  same  William  de  Ripa- 
riis that  he  should  have  any  right  or  seisin  therein  otherwise 
than  by  his  force  and  power,  as  in  the  land  of  another.  It  seems 
to  them  that  William  de  Ripariis  and  the  others  did  unjustly 
disseise  the  said  William  de  Polhamford'.  Therefore  it  is  con- 
sidered that  William  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  all  the  others 
are  in  mercy  except  William  de   Ripariis,  because  the  jurors 

3  E 


394  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

.  .  .  .  [say]  that  the  same  William  was  not  present,  nor 
inciting,  nor  did  William  de  Polhamford  put  this  upon  him 
.  .  .  .  as  the  same  William  de  Polhamford*  admits.  There- 
fore William  made  no  disseisin,  and  so  he  is  quit  of  amercement, 
and  William  de  Polhamford  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim 
against  him.  Damages,  205.,  because  for  so  much  they  let 
{locaverunt)  that  tenement,  and  they  have  received  so  much.^ 

Memb.  ^d. 

1428.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  le 
Mazun  and  Margery  his  wife  and  Thomas  Trevet  unjustly,  etc. 
disseised  Emma  de  Wallavington  of  her  free  tenement  in  Periton*, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  her  of  two  messuages,  five  acres  of  land,  and  one  acre 
and  a-half  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances.  Thomas  Trevet 
comes,  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made  because 
the  said  Emma  elsewhere  impleaded  him  upon  an  assize*  of 
novel  disseisin,  and  that  the  assize  was  taken  before  R.  de 
Thurkelby  and  his  companions,  justices  itinerant,  in  the  county 
of  Somerset ;  so  that,  by  such  assize,  he  retained  the  tenement, 
and  vouched  to  warranty  the  rolls  of  the  said  justices.  Therefore 
she  may  sue  if  she  pleases  {et  ideo  ipsa  sequatur  si  voluerit). 

1429.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Geoffry  de 
Mandeviir  and  Simon  the  serjeant  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Ralph 
son  of  Richard  de  Estcoker  of  his  free  tenement  in  Estcoker, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
besides  one  acre  and  a-half  of  land  and  one  acre  of  meadow, 
etc.  Geoffry  did  not  come,  and  it  was  testified  that  he  was  in 
parts  beyond  the  seas.  Simon  the  serjeant  comes,  and  John 
Pycot,  Geoffry's  bailiff,  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be 
made  because  Ralph  never  was  seised  [of  the  land],  and  thereon 
he  {sic)  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Ralph  comes,  and  says 
that  he  was  in  seisin  by  the  gift  of  one  Gerard  Costantin  and 
one  Margery  his  wife,  his  [Ralph's]  mother,  and  this  well 
appears  ;  for  when  Margery  his  mother  elsewhere,  before  H. 
de  Bracton  and  his  companions,  arraigned  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  touching  the  same  land  against  Geoffry  de  Mandevill, 
the  same  Geoffry  did  not  come,  but  the  said  John  Picot   his 

'  This  is  another,  but  cancelled,  record  of  the  suit  on  memb.  i^  of  the  same  roll : 
see  No.  1423.  "  Over  this  word  is  written  "  dreve." 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  395 


bailiff  [came],  who  answered  the  assize,  and  said  that  it  ought 

not  to  be  made  because  Margery  was  not  in  seisin  of  the  same 

land  when  the  said  Geoffry  put  himself  upon  the  land,  so  that 

she  might  be  disseised,  for  she  and  the  said  Gerard  her  husband 

had  before  that  enfeoffed  the  said  Ralph  her  son  by  her  charter, 

and  Geoffry  claimed  nothing  in  [the  land]  beyond  custody ;  and 

because  Margery-  could  not  contradict  this,   Geoffry   withdrew 

without  a  day,  and  Margery  was  in  mercy,  and  thereon  he  put 

himself  upon  the  rolls  of  the  said  Henry  [de  Bracton],and  craved 

judgment  whether  since  he  [John]  then  admitted  that  he  [Ralph] 

was  in  seisin,  he  could  now  deny  that  he  [Ralph]   had    seisin. 

The   rolls    are   examined,  which   testify  the  same,    but    Ralph 

says  that  whilst  the  said  John  cannot  deny  what  he  previously 

admitted  in  court,  that  Ralph  should  have  his  seisin,  [the  matter] 

should  go  further  to  a  jury  {ad  juratmn)  touching  the  entry  of 

Geoffry   upon  the   land  after  Ralph's  seisin.      The  jurors,  the 

assize  being  taken  by  way  of  jury  \in  moduvijuf  capl\  say  upon 

their  oath  that  they  know  notliing  of  the  entry  except  that  he 

[Geoffry]  took  the  land  into  his  hand  and  had  it  in  his  hand  for 

one  year,  and  afterwards  enfeoffed  the  said  Simon  thereof  by  his 

charter,  and  certain  of  the  jurors  say  that  they  saw  and  heard  the 

charter  sealed  with  his  seal,  and  also  that  he  sent  his  letters 

patent  to  his  bailiffs  to  put  Simon  in  seisin  of  the  said  land,  and 

therefore  the  said  Margery,  as  soon  as  Geoffry  would  take  the 

land  into  his  hand,  forthwith  procured  her  writ  of  novel  disseisin 

against  him,  on  which  she  failed,  as  is  aforesaid.     After  she  failed 

on  that  assize  the  said  Ralph  without  delay  procured  [his  writ] 

whether,  etc.     Therefore,  because  the  said  bailiff  cannot  deny 

the  seisin  of  the  said  Ralph  which  he  previously  admitted  in 

court,  and  the  said  Geoffry  could  have  no  entry  upon  the  land 

after  that  seisin,  except  injuriously  to  the  feoffment  of  Ralph,  for 

Ralph  was  not  then  under  age,  nor  by  reason  of  custody  because 

Ralph  was  enfeoffed  whilst  under  age,  nor  did  he  claim  to  hold 

anything  of  the  said  Geoffry,  and  if  he  was  not  enfeoffed  [while] 

under  age  he  ought  to  hold  the  land  in  socage,  it  is  considered 

that  Geoffry  and  Simon  did  unjustly  disseise  him.     Therefore 

Ralph  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  they  are  in  mercy,  and  John 

Picot   likewise,   because   he  now   denied   what   he   had    before 

admitted  in  court.     Damages,  4  marks  3^.* 

*  This  seems  a  somewhat  complicated  story.     If  the  land  was  of  socage  tenure 
Geoffry  couid  have  no  claim  as  guardian.     The  guardianship  would  be  with  the  next- 


396  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Metnb.  jd. 

Assizes  taken  at  Toriton  on  Monday  next  after  the  feast  of 
St.  Michael,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton,  William  de  Hyivis, 
and  their  companions,  etc. 

1430.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  de 
Kytincoe'  and  William  de  Crofter  unjustly,  etc  disseised 
William  Coterel  of  his  free  tenement  in  la  Clyve,  since  the  first, 
etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of 
half  a  ferling  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  said  vill, 
and  whereon  it  is  said  that  one  Robert  de  Clyve  gave  that  land 
in  free  marriage  with  his  sister,  and  that  he  [William  Coterel] 
was  in  seisin  for  twenty- four  years  until  the  said  Thomas  and 
William  unjustly  disseised  him,  etc  Thomas  and  William  come, 
and  say  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because  the  said 
William  Coterel  never  had  a  fee  there  nor  a  free  tenement  from 
which  he  might  be  disseised,  because  in  truth  that  land  never 
was  given  in  free  marriage  by  the  said  Robert,  for  one  Wymarca, 
Robert's  wife,^  held  that  land  as  that  which  was  assigned  to  her 
in  dower,  and  after  the  death  of  Robert  she  remained  in  seisin 
of  the  land,  and  the  said  William  Coterel  and  his  wife  likewise 
with  her ;  and  that  he  had  no  free  tenement  nor  any  entry 
therein  otherwise  than  by  the  said  Wymarca  they  put  themselves 
upon  the  jury.  William  Coterel  says  that  the  said  Robert  gave 
him  the  land  in  free  marriage  with  his  wife,  and  by  his  [Robert's] 
charter,  which  he  proffers  and  which  testifies  this,  that  he  had 
no  entry  in  the  land  by  the  said  Wymarca,  but  by  the  said 
Robert  as  is  aforesaid,  he  puts  himself  upon  the  jury,  and  the 
said  Thomas  and  William  likewise.  The  jurors  say  upon  their 
oath  that  the  said  Robert  enfeoffed  the  said  William  Coterel  of 
the  said  land  as  is  aforesaid,  and  by  the  consent  and  wish  of 
Wymarca  his  mother,  who  held  that  land  in  dower,  and  [she] 
made  feoffment  to  the  said  Robert  her  son,  so  that  she  had  no 
seisin  therein  except  of  coming  and  going,  and  at  the  will  of 
the  said  Coterel   and  his  wife,  and  that  they  were  always  in 

of-kin  of  Ralph  on  the  father's  or  mother's  side  opposed  to  that  from  which  the  land 
was  derived.  If  it  was  held  under  knight  service  Geoffry  was  wrong,  because  the 
land  did  not  vest  by  descent,  but  by  purchase.  Moreover,  even,  if  Geoffry  were  guardian, 
and  by  virtue  ol  his  position  he  had  entered  and  enfeoffed  another,  that  would  be  a 
disseisin  :  Bract.,  fo.  i6ib.  Finally,  Geoffry  and  his  people  were  estopped  by  the 
previous  record. 

^  1 1  appears  by  the  finding  of  the  jurors  that  she  was  Robertas  mother. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  397 

seisin  thereof  as  of  a  free  tenement  until  the  said  Thomas  and 
the  others  unjustly  disseised  them.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  the  said  Coterel  and  his  wife  should  recover  their  seisin  by 
view  of  the  jurors,  and  Thomas  and  the  others  arc  in  mercy. 
Damages,  10s. 

143 1.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Bosco  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Richard  Quintin  of  his  free  tene- 
ment in  Sukadebir*/  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is 
complained  that  he  disseised  him  of  a  certain  meadow  of  twenty 
perches  in  length  and  of  four  perches  in  breadth.  Robert  comes, 
and  says  that  the  soil  of  the  said  meadow  which  Richard  put  in 
view,  to  the  length  of  ten  feet  is  his,  Robert's,  by  covenant  made 
between  Richard's  father  and  him,  Robert ;  and  in  truth  another 
part  of  the  meadow  of  the  length  of  ten  feet  is  his,  Robert's  ;  but 
that  when  that  part  was  mown,  the  hay  of  Richard's  part  was 
mixed  with  the  hay  of  Robert's  part,  and  Robert's  men  came 
and  carried  off  the  whole  of  that  hay.  And  although  Robert 
knew  this  and  would  make  amends,  yet  Richard  would  not 
receive  compensation  nor  his  hay,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  a  certain 
covenant  was  made  between  the  said  Robert  and  William 
Quintin,  Richard's  father,  touching  the  making  of  an  exchange 
of  the  said  meadow  if  the  said  Richard  should  consent,  whose 
inheritance  that  land  was,  through  his  mother,  for  his  father 
could  claim  nothing  therein,  otherwise  than  for  his  life  by  the 
law  of  England,*  and  the  writings  were  made  and  deposited  in 
independent  hands  (in  equali  manu)  until  the  coming  of  Richard 
into  those  parts.  When  Richard  came  he  would  in  no  way 
assent  to  the  covenant  or  to  the  exchange,  so  that  the  covenant 
remained  unmade  because  the  said  Richard  straightway  took 
the  meadow  into  his  own  hand  and  his  seisin  was  viewed,  and 
the  hay  of  one  year  was  mown  and  carried  off.  In  the  second 
year  Robert  came  and  carried  off  hay  as  well  from  Richard's 
part  as  from  his  own,  which  he  would  have  given  in  exchange. 
Wherefore  they  say  that  the  said  Robert  did  unjustly  disseise 
the  said  Richard.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Richard 
should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy.     Damages,  2j. 

1432.  The  same  assize,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to 
recognise  whether  the  said  Robert  unjustly  raised  a  certain  dyke 

'  Soulh  Cadbury.  '  That  is,  as  tenant  by  the  Curtesy. 


398  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

to  the  injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Richard  in  the  same  vill, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  Robert 
inclosed  by  a  dyke  a  certain  wood  wherein  he  [Richard]  was 
wont  to  common,  so  that  he  is  not  able  to  enter  it  or  to  have  his 
common  as  he  ought  to  have.  Robert  comes,  and  says  that  the 
assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  for  if  there  should  be  there  any 
injury  or  .  .  .  dyke  raised,  it  was  done  in  the  time  of 
Richard's  ancestor  and  not  in  his  time,  and  thereon  he  puts 
[himself  on  the  assize].  Richard  comes,  and  cannot  deny  this. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Robert  [may  go]  quit,  and  that 
Richard  .  .  .  [take  nothing  by  that  assize],  but  be  in  mercy 
for  his  false  claim.* 

Memb.  M. 

Assizes  taken  at  Kenemerdon  on  Monday  next  after  the  feast 
of  St  Katharine,  in  the  thirty-sixth  year,  before  H[enry]  de 
Bracton  and  William  de  ^  his  companion,  etc. 

1433.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  de  Aure, 
David  Russell,  Robert  le  Blund,  Hugh  le  Bygod,  Maurice  le 
Lond*,  and  many  others  in  the  original  writ  named,  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  Henry  le  Bygod  of  his  free  tenement  in  Marston, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  half  a  knight's  fee,  with  the  appurtenances. 
Questioned  how  it  should  be  his  free  tenement,  he  says  that  on 
the  second  Saturday  after  the  feast  of  St.  Michael  in  this  year, 
his  father  died  seised  of  that  tenement  as  of  fee,  and  he  [Henry] 
on  the  morrow,  to  wit,  on  Sunday,  put  himself  upon  the  tenement 
as  son  and  heir,  legitimately  born  of  his  father.  On  the  second 
day  after  that  came  one  Richard  Coffe,  bailiff  of  the  said  John 
de  Aure,  the  chief  lord  of  that  fee,  and  seised  the  land  into  the 
hand  of  his  lord,  and  called  together  all  the  free  tenants  and 
others  who  were  there  [to  be]  before  his  lord  on  the  morrow  to 
do  fealty  to  him  and  such  other  things  as  by  right  they  ought 
to  do.  On  that  day  John  de  Aure  came  thither  as  chief  lord, 
and  would  have  entry  into  the  houses,  and  the  said  Henry  came 
to  meet  him,  and  offered  him  his  homage  and  relief,  and  would 

*  Obfserv'e,  the  question  tried  was  not  whether  Robert  had  a  right  to  do  what  he 
<iid — perhaps  he  had  not — but  whether  his  act  deprived  Richard  of  his  seisin?  It  did 
not,  because,  having  l)een  done  l>ef()re  Richara's  ownership  began,  he  was  never 
seized  of  that  of  which  he  said  he  was  deprived. 

^  Blank  in  the  original. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  399 

fully  grant  him  entry  if  he  [John]  would  not  disturb  anyone ; 
but  the  said  John  would  not  do  this,  but  [desired]  that  Henry 
should  go  out,  and  all  others  who  were  in  the  house.  Henry 
said  that  he  had  no  counsel  to  do  this  thing,  and  the  said  John 
took  the  fealty  of  the  men  and  so  withdrew  from  the  place, 
and  that  it  was  so  he  [Henry]  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 
John  comes,  and  says  that  he  did  not  disseise  him  [Henry]  of 
any  free  tenement,  but  in  truth,  he  says,  he  came  thither  as 
chief  lord  of  the  fee  and  desired  to  have  pure  seisin  {puram 
seisinafu)  thereof,  saving  anybody's  right,  and  he  sought  by  all 
means  that  the  said  Henry  and  all  those  who  were  with  him 
there  should  go  out,  and  he  required  the  said  Henry  that  he 
should  show  what  right,  if  any,  he  [Henry]  had  in  that  tene- 
ment, and  that  he  should  do  to  him  whatever  he  ought  to  do, 
according  to  the  law  of  the  land.  Because  Henry  refused  this, 
he  [John]  sent  the  said  David  and  all  the  others  who  came  thither 
and  ejected  Henry,  and  that  it  was  so  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize.  Henry  says  that  when  he  was  ejected  from  his  tene- 
ment he  straightway  came  to  his  lord  and  offered  him  his 
homage  as  before,  and  he  [John]  would  not  take  it.  Afterwards 
he  asked  his  lord  if  he  avowed  the  deed  of  his  men,  and  he 
[John]  said  that  he  would  fully  avow  some  things  that  they 
had  been  able  to  do,  and  other  things  not,  but  it  was  manifest 
that  he  avowed  their  deed  because  he  would  not  undo  the 
matter,  but  soon  after  he  came  and  stayed  there  and  put  Hugh, 
brother  of  Henry,  in  seisin  of  the  tenement,  and  thereon  he  put 
himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  con- 
cerning the  seisin  of  Henry  in  all  things  as  the  same  Henry 
says  because  he  heard  of  the  death  of  his  father  before  anyone 
else,  but  they  say  positively  {betie  dicunt)  that  he  was  not  un- 
justly disseised  of  any  free  tenement  because  he  had  not  any 
free  tenement  there,  nor  could  he  at  this  time  have  any,  because 
the  said  Hugh  his  brother  is  the  first-born  and  legitimate  son  of 
his  father,  whose  inheritance  that  land  was.  Wherefore  they  say 
positively  that  John  and  the  others  did  not  disseise  him  unjustly, 
and  because  he  had  no  seisin  otherwise  than  by  intrusion. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the  said  John  and  the  others  are 
quit,  and  that  Henry  should  take  nothing  by  that  assize,  but 
should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.^ 

'  At  Brst  sight  this  decision  almost  looks  like  an  exception  to  the  rule,  that  a 
question  of  right  could  not  be  tried  on  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin.     But  it  is  cot  sa 


400  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


Memb.  9. 

Assizes  taken  at  Behangre  on  Wednesday  next  before  the  feast 
of  St.  George,  in  the  forty-first  year  of  the  reign  of  King 
Henry,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton  and  his  companions 
assigned  for  this. 

1434.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Stures,  Roger  de  Stures,  William  Selewood,  and  John  de  Stures 
unjustly,  etc.  disseised  the  Master  of  the  Knights  Templars  in 
England  of  his  free  tenement  in  Wurle,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and 
whereon  the  same  Master,  by  his  attorney,  by  writ  of  our  lord 
the  King,  complains  that  they  disseised  him  of  one  hundred  and 
five  and  a-half  acres  of  land  and  of  one  messuage,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  the  same  [vill],  and  whereon  he  says  that  the 
said  William  de  Stures  enfeoffed  the  Master  of  the  said  land  by 
his  charter,  which  he  proffers  and  which  testifies  that  the  same 
William  gave  and  granted,  and  by  his  charter  confirmed  to  God 
and  the  Blessed  Mary,  the  Master  and  [his]  brethren,  knights  of 
the  Temple  of  Solomon  in  England,  all  the  lands  and  tenements 
which  he  held  in  the  vill  of  Wurle  to  have  and  to  hold  to  the  said 
Master  of  the  Knights  of  the  Temple  of  Solomon  in  England 
and  [his]  brethren  in  pure  and  perpetual  alms  as  freely  and 
quietly  as  any  alms  could  be  given  to  any  religious  house ; 
and  whereon  the  same  Master  says  that  by  that  gift  and 
feoffment  he  was  in  good  and  peaceful  seisin  for  one  year  and 
more  until  the  said  William  and  the  others  unjustly  and  without 
judgment  disseised  him  thereof,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  William  de  Stures  comes,  but  Roger  and  the 
others  do  not  come,  and  they  were  not  attached  because  they 
were  not  found.  William  says  that  he  never  made  a  charter  of 
feoffment  to  them,  but  that  whilst  he  was  staying  at  a  certain 
manor  of  the  said  Master  and  brethren  at  Cumb'  they  forced  his 
seal  from  him  {rapueriint  sigillum  suuni)  and  made  what  charter 
they  wished  while  he  was  infirm  and  unable  to  resist  them,  and 

The  question  here  was,  Had  Henry  any  seisin  ?  In  other  words,was  he  in  such  possession 
that  to  eject  him  would  amount  to  a  disseisin  ?  The  jurors  found  on  the  facts  that  he 
was  not.  With  the  advantage  of  earliest  knowledge  of  his  father's  death  he  attempted 
to  snatch  possession.  The  true  lord  of  the  fee  promptly  removed  him.  This  was 
witliin  his  rights.  **  Item  excipi  poterit  contra  intrusores  et  disseysitores  si  contra 
verum  dominum  petant  per  assisam  si  post  intrusicmm  vel  disseysinam  ejecti  fueritU 
quod  nuilam  sevsinam  habuerunt  pacificatn^  quia  ipse  verus  dominus  cos  recenter 
cjuit post  ifUrusioneni  et  dissfysinam,'*    Bracton,  fo.  ao6^. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assiite.  The  jurors  say  that  in 
truth  the  said  William  at  first  gave  to  the  Master  one  messuage 
and  a  curtilage  in  the  said  vill  of  Wurle ;  and  when  the  chici 
lord  of  that  fee  heard  of  this,  and  would  not  that  the  Master  and 
his  brethren  should  enter  upon  his  fee,  the  said  William  dc 
Stures  came  with  his  seal  hanging  about  his  neck  and  confessed 
before  the  whole  parish  that  he  gave  and  granted,  and  by  his 
charter  confirmed,  to  the  said  Master  and  his  brethren  all  the 
said  tenement  as  is  aforesaid.  Wherefore  they  say  that  the 
said  William  and  the  others  unjustly  and  without  judgment  did 
disseise  the  said  Master.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  the 
Master  should  recover  his  seisin  and  damages,  and  that  William 
should  be  in  mercy.  He  is  poor  (Jiauper  est).  Damages, 
2  marks. 

Mtnib.  lo. 

1435-  Hugh  son  of  Humphrey  de  Aluneneford'  puts  in  his 
place  Roger  de  Langport,  clerk,  against  Margery  daughter  of 
Iseult  on  a  plea  of  land,  whereon  an  assize  of  mort  d'ancestor  [is 
claimed]. 

1436.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Waleram  de 
Welcsl'  unjustly,  etc  obstructed  a  certain  way  in  Welesl'  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  Walter  de  Cosington  in  Doltincot', 
since  the  first,  etc,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  whilst  he 
[Walter]  and  his  men  and  his  ancestors  were  always  wont  to 
drive  {cha^iare)  their  beasts  and  to  carry  {cariare)  by  cars  and 
carts  {cam's  el  carettis)  to  a  certain  moor  of  his  [every]  second 
year,  the  said  Waleram  obstructed  the  way,  so  thai  they  cannot 
drive  as  they  were  wont,  and  thereon  he  puts  him.self  upon  the 
assize.  Waleram  does  not  come,  but  his  bailiff  comes,  and  says 
that  he  has  not  obstructed  any  way  to  the  injury  of  Walter's 
free  tenement,  because  they  [Walter  and  his  men]  have  sul^cient 
way  whereby  he  and  his  men  may  and  ought  to  drive.  And 
thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 

The  same  assize,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to  recognise 
whether  Waleram  dc  Welesl'  and  John  Long  {Lotigus)  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  Walter  de  Cosington  of  his  free  tenement  in 
Doltincot',  since  the  first,  etc.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath 
that  one  William  Walerand  obstructed  a  way  where  the  said 
Walter  and  his  predecessors.  Canons  of  Wells,  were  always  wont 
to  drive  with  all  manner  of  drifts  (cAaa'is)  and  cartages  (cariagiis) ; 

3  F 


402  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

and  because  the  said  Walerand  would  not  amend  this  when  he 
knew  of  it,  it  is  considered  that  Walter  should  recover  his  seisin, 
and  Walerand  is  in  mercy. 

1437.  The  same  assize,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to 
recognise  whether  Walerand  de  Welesl*  unjustly,  etc.  disseised 
Walter  de  Cosinton'  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Welesl'  which 
appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  Dultincot*,  since  the  first,  etc., 
and  whereon  he  complains  that  whilst  he  has  been  accustomed 
to  have  common  there  in  every  second  year,  the  said  Walerand 
inclosed  the  land  by  a  dyke  and  quick  hedge  {viva  /laya)  so  that 
he  could  have  no  ingress  as  he  was  wont  to  have,  and  thereon  he 
puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Walerand's  bailiff  says  that  he 
did  not  disseise  him  of  any  common  because  he  could  well  enter 
the  pasture  and  enjoy  his  seisin,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon 
the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  one  William 
son  of  him,  Walerand.  inclosed  the  land  with  the  said  hedge 
and  dyke,  and  not  the  said  Walerand,  for  he  was  at  that  time 
in  Ireland,  but  because  his  men  have  come  from  Ireland  into 
England,  and  have  gone  back,  and  the  said  Walerand'  might 
have  amended  this  thing,  and  did  not,  it  is  considered  that 
Walerand  did  disseise  him  unjustly.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  Walter  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Walerand  is  in  mercy. 
Damages,  2s. 

1438.  The  same  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Roger 
Nicet  and  Matilda  his  wife,  and  all  the  others  named  in  the 
original  writ,  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Walter  de  Cosington'  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Dultiucot',  since  the  first,  etc,  and  whereon 
it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  ten  acres  of  land. 
Roger  and  all  the  others  come,  and  say  that  the  land  of  Dultin- 
cot'  and  the  land  of  Dinre^  are  common,  so  that  the  men  of 
Doltincot'  and  of  Dinre  ought  to  have  common  [there] ;  and 
when  the  said  Walter  would  enclose  and  cultivate  the  land  the 
said  men  of  Dinre  came  and  depastured  the  herbage  as  of  their 
common,  and  thereon  they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize.  The 
jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  in  truth  the  said  Walter  did 
cultivate  the  said  ten  acres  immediately  after  the  Nativity,  and 
at  Easter  next  following  the  said  men  came  to  Walter  and  told 
him  that  he  should  shut  in  his  crop,  and  the  said  Walter 
thoroughly  inclosed  it  with  a  hedge.  Afterwards,  on  Friday 
next  before  Pentecost  next  following,  the  said  men  came  and 

*  Dinder, 


SOMERSETSHIRE  FLEAS. 


403 


broke  down  his  hedge  and  depastured  his  crop.  Wherefore  they 
say  that  they  [the  men]  did  unjustly  disseise  the  said  Walter. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  he  should  recover  his  seisin,  and 
Rof;er  Nicet  and  all  the  others  are  in  mercy.     Damages.  20s. 

M39-  The  same  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Walerand 
de  Wclesl'  and  John  Long  of  Dultincot'  unjustly,  etc.  disseised 
Walter  de  Cosington  of  his  free  tenement  in  Dultincot'.  since  the 
first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  when  he  [Walter] 
would  make  a  little  enclosure  (parviim parcuut)  in  the  midst  of  his 
land  the  said  Walerand  caused  his  wall  to  be  thrown  down. 
Walerand's  bailiff  comes,  and  says  that  the  soil  of  the  pinfold 
{pun/aufie)  is  Walter's,  and  that  Walerand  and  his  men  should 
have  common  there,  but  they  {sic)  say  that  Walerand  did  not 
throw  down  the  said  wall.'  However,  as  the  transgression  is 
small,  it  is  ordered  that  the  wall  be  rebuilt,  and  be  as  it  was 
before. 

1440.  Nicholas  Michel,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Ralph  Russel  and  certain  others  touching  tene- 
ments in  Horsinton'  and  in  Chcrinton',  came  and  withdrew  him- 
self. Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to 
wit,  Nicholas  de  Litleton  and  Peter  de  la  Marc.  It  has  been 
agreed  between  them  that  all  disputes  between  them  should  be 
seen  and  terminated  by  four  trustworthy  and  lawful  knights 
chosen  by  common  assent  by  Batholomcw  de  Emncberg'  and 
William  Fukerham  of  the  one  part  and  Martin  de  Legh  and 
Henry  de  Monte  forti  of  the  other  part,  and  this  by  the  octave 
of  St.  Michael  next,  and  to  this  they  have  pledged  their  faith. 
The  said  Ralph  mainprises  that  the  house  of  Nicholas,  which  was 
thrown  down,  should  be  restored  to  the  same  state,  or  better  tlian 
it  was  [before]. 

1441.  The  assize  between  Agnes  ate  Thume,  querent,  and 
Richard  de  Kideford  and  Ralph  de  Poveslehad  touching  a  tene- 
ment in  Kideford  remains  without  a  day  because  Agnes  has 
died. 

1443.  The  assize  between  Edith  dc  la  Morland,  querent,  and 
William  de  la  Morland,  and  certain  others  in  the  original  writ 
named,  touching  a  tenement  in  Radeslod'  [remains]  without  a 
day  because  Edith  has  died, 

1443.  Christiana   de   !a   Bere,  Nicholas   and   John   sons  of 

rather  ihan  of 


404  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

Christiana,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin  against 
Master  Walter  de  Sancto  Quintino,  Archdeacon  of  Tanton', 
concerning  a  tenement  in  Welleford,  do  not  proceed.  The 
Archdeacon  is  told  that  he  may  go  as  he  came.^ 

1444.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Osbert  de 
Kareviir,  Walter  le  Page,  and  John  le  Blund,  unjustly,  etc, 
disseised  Ralph  de  Karevill  of  his  free  tenement  in  Lx)kynton', 
since  the  first,  etc,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  dis- 
seised him  of  one  messuage  and  thirteen  acres  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances.  Osbert  and  the  others  come,  and  say  positively 
that  they  have  not  disseised  Ralph  of  any  free  tenement,  and 
thereon  they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say 
upon  their  oath  that  Osbert  and  the  others  have  not  disseised 
Ralph  of  any  free  tenement,  because  in  truth  Osbert  at  another 
time  impleaded  the  said  Ralph  his  brother  in  the  court  of  our 
lord  the  King  before  his  justices  itinerant  at  Ivelcestr*  in  the 
county  of  Somerset,  so  that  by  the  consideration  of  the  same  court 
the  said  Osbert  recovered  his  seisin  against  Ralph  as  well  of  the 
said  messuage  and  thirteen  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
as  of  other  land  touching  which  he  was  impleaded.  Wherefore 
they  say  that  the  said  Osbert  and  the  others  have  not  disseised 
him  of  any  free  tenement  unjustly.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  Osbert  and  the  others  [may  go]  quit  thereof,  and  that  Ralph 
de  Carviir  should  take  nothing  by  that  assize,  but  should  be  in 
mercy  for  his  false  claim. 

1445.  The  assize  of  novel  disseisin  which  Simon  de  Morton' 
and  Diana  his  wife  arraigned  against  the  Prior  de  Monte  Acute 
touching  a  tenement  in  Cherlet'  remains  without  a  day  because 
Simon  has  died  as  she,  Diana,  confesses. 

Memb,  lod. 

1446.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  de  Ho, 
Ralph  de  Greb'ge,  John  de  Holne,  Robert  de  Bradel,  John 
l^ynorthcweye,  Sampson  de  la  Holse,  Sillol  de  Holse,  Walter 
Togot,  Hugh  Bot,  Robert  son  of  William,  Gilbert  Aylmer, 
Clement  de  Knaplok',  Richard  de  Mulshangre,  Roger  de  la 
Leyc,  Stephen  Chase,  and  William  de  Muleshangre  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  the  Abbot  of  Ford  of  his  free  tenement  in  Has- 
weye  and  Luscum,  since  the  first,  etc.  And  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  they  disseised  him  of  twenty-three  acres  of  land,  with 

^  "  Peret' "  is  written  in  the  margin  against  this  case. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  401; 

the  appurtenances,  whereof  he  says  that  he  was  in  good  seisin, 
and  [that]  he  depastured  the  herbage  and  cut  furze,  and  was 
in  such  seisin  until  all  the  above-named  disseised  him.  Thomas 
and  Ralph,  and  all  the  others  come,  and  say  that  part  of  the 
tenement  which  the  Abbot  put  in  his  view  is  in  Wynesford'  and 
not  in  Loscum,  and  thereon  they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize. 
The  Abbot  says  that  the  tenement  is  in  Loscum  and  not  in 
Wyiieford',  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Con- 
cerning the  tenement  in  Aswey,  touching  which  the  abbot 
complains,  Thomas  and  Ralph  and  the  others  say  positively 
that  they  have  not  disseised  him  of  any  tenement  there,  and 
on  that  they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say 
upon  their  oath  that  fifteen  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  respect  of  which  the  Abbot  complains  [as  in]  Loscum,  are 
not  in  Loscum,  but  belongs  to  Wynesford'.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Thomas  and  Ralph  and  all  the  others  [may  go] 
quit,  and  that  the  Abbot  should  take  nothing  by  this  assize,  but 
should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.  Touching  the  eight  acres 
of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Aswcye,  the  jurors  say  that 
Thomas  and  the  others  did  not  disseise  the  Abbot.  Therefore 
Thomas  and  all  the  others  [may  go]  quit,  and  the  Abbot  is  in 
mercy.     The  Abbot's  amercement,  5  marks. 

Memb.  11. 
Assizes  taken  at  Shepton  on  the  morrow  of  St.  Laurence,  in  the 
thirty -seventh  year. 

1447.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  son 
of  William  and  Robert  his  son,  Henry  Lauval,  and  Henry  le 
Breder  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Isabella,  formerly  the  wife  of 
William  son  of  Adam,  of  her  free  tenement  in  Est  Cherlcton',' 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  her  of  about  one  acre  and  a-half,  of  which  she  was  in 
peaceful  seisin  for  two  years,  as  forming  part  of  her  dower,  until 
they  dissei.sed  her.  William  and  all  the  others,  except  Henry 
le  Broder,  come,  and  say  that  they  have  not  disseised  iier  of  any 
free  tenement,  because  the  tenement  touching  which  she  com- 
plains is  the  inheritance  of  William  ;  and  that  she  was  never 
seised  thereof  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Isabella  comes 
and  says,  as  before,  that  the  tenement  was  assigned  to  her  in 

'  CharltoD  Adam 


406  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

dower,  and  that  she  was  in  good  seisin  thereof  until  William 
and  the  others  disseised  her,  and  thereon  she  puts  herself  upon 
the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  said 
tenement  was  assigned  to  Isabella  in  dower  by  extent  and 
by  the  sheriff,  and  that  she  was  in  good  seisin  thereof  until 
the  said  William  and  the  others  disseised  her.  Therefore  it 
is  considered  that  she  should  recover  her  seisin  by  view  of 
the  jurors,  and  William  and  the  others  are  in  mercy.  William's 
amercement,  ^  mark.     Damages,  ^  mark. 

1448.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Andrew  de 
Straton  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Henry  de  Holecum  of  his  free 
tenement  in  Holecumb',  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is 
complained  that  he  disseised  him  of  one  enclosure  {tnnec\  to  wit, 
of  a  certain  culture  {cuUura)  which  contains  twelve  acres.  Andrew 
comes,  and  fully  concedes  that  the  soil  belongs  to  Henry,  but  he 
says  in  truth  he  [Andrew]  should  have  common  thereon  every 
second  year  when  the  land  should  lie  fallow  ;  but  when  the  said 
Henry  would  crop  {inbladare)  that  land  in  the  second  year,  the 
said  Andrew  put  his  cattle  upon  the  tenement  and  depastured 
the  herbage  and  crops,  and  whatever  there  was  cultivated. 
Henry  comes,  and  says  that  he  [Andrew]  ought  not  to  have 
common  there  every  second  year  after  that  land  was  inclosed 
and  tilled,  because  neither  the  said  Andrew  nor  his  heirs  were 
able  to  demand  or  exact  any  right,  claim,  or  common  in  any  of 
his  [Henry's]  enclosures,  and  thereon  he  proffers  Andrew's 
charter,  which  testifies  this.  Andrew  fully  admits  the  charter, 
but  says  that  in  truth,  before  and  after  the  making  of  the 
charter,  the  said  Andrew  had  his  common  every  second  year, 
and  that  this  be  the  truth  he  likewise  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize.  Henry  says  that  after  the  making  of  the  charter 
[Andrew]  never  had  common  there,  except  by  force,  and 
thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon 
their  oath  that,  after  the  making  of  the  charter,  the  said  Andrew 
intruded  upon  the  culture  with  his  cattle  by  force  and  against 
the  will  of  Henry,  and  depastured  the  herbage,  so  that  Henry 
raised  the  hue  {levavit  utfte^).  Wherefore  they  say  that  Andrew 
did  unjustly  disseise  Henry.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  he 
should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Andrew  is  in  mercy.  Andrew's 
amercement,  ^  mark.  William  de  Carswell',  one  of  the  jurors 
is  in  mercy  for  his  contempt,  because  he  withdrew  after  he  was 
sworn.    Damages,  los. 


SOMERSKTRHIRE   PLEAS. 


407 


1449.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  dc 
Bereford",  father  of  Richard,  was  seised  in  his  demesne,  etc,  of 
one  messuage  and  seven  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  Hereford'  on  the  day.  etc..  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land 
Nicholas  de  Hereford"  and  Lclticc  his  wife  hold,  who  come  and 
say  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made  because  the  said 
Richard  de  Hereford",  the  father,  gave  that  land  to  Lettice  seven 
years  before  his  death,  and  they  proffer  a  charter  of  the  said 
Richard,  his  [Richard's]  father,  which  testifies  this,  and  that  this 
is  so  he'  (sic)  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Richard  de  Hereford' 
comes,  and  says  that  the  charter  ought  not  to  hurt  him,  because 
neither  by  the  charter  nor  by  that  gift  were  the  said  Nicholas 
and  Lettice  ever  in  seisin,  for  the  said  Richard,  the  father,  tilled 
the  land  and  died  seised  thereof,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  Nicholas  and  Lettice  say  that  Richard,  the 
father,  never  had  seisin  of  that  land,  nor  died  seised  thereof 
after  he  had  made  the  gift  to  them,  and  thereon  they  (sic)  put 
themselves  upon  the  assize,  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath 
that  Richard,  the  father,  made  a  certain  charter  to  the  said 
Lettice  of  the  said  land,  but  that  Nicholas  and  Lettice  were 
never  in  seisin  of  the  land  by  that  gift,  for  the  said  Richard, 
the  father,  tilled  it  and  took  all  profits  to  his  own  use,  so  that 
he  never  changed  his  state,  and  that  he  died  seised  thereof. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Richard  should  recover  his  seisin, 
and  Nicholas  and  Lettice  are  in  mercy.  Amercement  of 
Nicholas,  i  mark. 

145a  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Prior  of 
Briwton*  unjustly  raised  a  certain  dyke  in  Briwton  to  the  injury 
of  the  free  tenement  of  William  dc  Cumb'  in  Cumb",  since  the 
first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  where  he  [William] 
was  accustomed  to  drive  all  manner  of  cattle  and  cars  and  carts 
to  a  certain  pasture  of  his,  the  said  Prior  raided  the  dyke  so  that  he 
could  no  longer  drive  as  he  was  accustomed.  The  Prior  comes,  and 
says  that  he  has  not  raised  any  dyke  there  unjustly,  for  he  says 
that  in  truth  every  second  year,  when  the  field  is  cultivated, 
neither  William  nor  any  other  men  of  the  country  are  able  or 
ought  to  drive  there  except  for  the  year  during  which  the  field 
lies  fallow,  and  then  by  the  will  and  favour  of  the  Prior  and  [in 
return]  for  trusses  of  hay  (pro  trussis  ftni)  which  he  [William] 
U  commao  enough  where 


408  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

and  his  ancestors  were  accustomed  to  give  for  that  road  ;  and  that 
he  [William]  ought  not  in  any  other  manner  to  drive  there  he 
[the  Prior]  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Afterwards  William 
came  and  withdrew  himself  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to 
prosecute  are  in  mercy,  to  wit,  Robert  de  Burcy,  Roger  de 
Stanton,  William  de  Spuketon*,  and  Walter  de  Fokcput  He 
made  fine  for  himself  and  his  pledges  for  20s.  by  pledge  of  the 
Prior  of  Briwton. 

Memb.  13, 

145 1.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  son  of 
William,  Robert  his  son,  Thomas  Eskelling,  Matthew  de  Dorset, 
John  Prat,  and  Robert  Singe  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Isabella, 
formerly  the  wife  of  William  son  of  Adam,  of  her  free  tenement 
in  Estcherleton,*  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained 
that  they  disseised  her  of  two  parts  of  five  virgatcs  of  land  and 
of  one  plot  of  ground  {placia)  about,  etc.,  which  the  said  Isabella 
had  by  the  gift  of  William  son  of  William  the  younger,  and  by 
his  charter,  and  whereof  she  was  seised  until  William  and  the 
others  unjustly  disseised  her,  etc  William,  Robert,  and  Thomas 
come,  and  say  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made  because 
Isabella  could  not  have  any  free  tenement  there ;  for  whatever 
she  may  say  about  the  feoffment  by  William  son  of  William  the 
younger,  he  was  seised  thereof  during  the  whole  of  his  life  with 
the  said  Isabella  his  mother,  and  took  the  profits,  and  died  seised 
thereof;  and  that  Isabella  never  had  seisin  of  the  said  land  during 
the  lifetime  of  William  by  herself  or  otherwise  than  with  the  said 
William  he  (sic)  puts  himself  upon  the  assize,  and  Isabella  does 
likewise.  The  jurors  say  that  the  said  William  son  of  William 
the  younger  gave  the  said  land  to  the  said  Isabella  his  mother, 
and  enfeoffed  her  thereof  by  his  charter  while  he  was  of  good 
memory  and  of  sound  mind,  and  she,  after  that  gift,  was  in 
peaceful  seisin  thereof  during  the  life  and  at  the  death  of 
William  from  the  day  of  St.  Laurence  to  Friday  next  after 
the  Assumption  of  the  Blessed  Mary  following,  and  by  herself 
alone  without  that  the  said  William  had  any  seisin  therein,  and 
until  the  said  William  and  the  others  unjustly  disseised  her. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  she  should  recover  her  seisin 
by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  William  and  the  others  are  in  mercy 
Damages,  i  mark. 

^  Charlton  Adam. 


409 


Memb.  141/. 

Assizes  taken  at  Pouldon'  on  Thursday  next  after  the  feast  of 

Sl  Micliael,  in   the  thirty- seventh  year,  before  H[cnry]  de 

Bracton  and  Stephen  de  Aston'  his  companiuii,  tic. 

1453.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  de  Batun 

unjustly,  etc.  disseised  William  de  Marisco  of  his  free  tenement  in 

Hunespiir.  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained 

(sic),  The  same  assize,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to  recognise 
whether  the  same  John  divertt-d  a  watercourse  to  the  injury  of 
the  free  tenement  of  him,  Wiliiam,  in  the  same  vill,  since  the 
first,  etc.  The  same  assi/e,  by  the  same  recognitors,  comes  to 
recognise  whether  the  said  John  obstructed  a  certain  way  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  him,  William,  in  the  same  vill, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  disseised 
hrm  of  two  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Bernemer 
furlang,  and  whereon  he  says  Ihat  [whenj  he  would  plough  that 
land  the  said  John  took  his  plough  and  detained  it  in  his  pound 
iparco)  until  he  [Wiiliam]  gave  him  \  mark.  Moreover,  he  says, 
that  at  one  time  when  he  put  a  crop  upon  the  land  he  [John] 
took  the  whole  crop  and  carried  it  off.  Further,  he  says,  that 
he  [John]  inclosed  two  acrts  and  a  half  in  Saltcmore,  in  the 
tenement  of  William,  with  a  dyke  so  that  he  could  not  come  to 
the  land  to  till  it,  nor  to  do  what  was  convcnlenL  Moreover,  he 
says  that  he  [John]  restored  (firmavd)  a  certain  weir  {£utgiUw) 
on  the  land  of  William  one  perch  in  length  and  one  foot  in  breadth 
'  in  Saltclond,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  John 
comes,  and  says  that  William  could  not  be  disseised  of  the  said 
Iwo  acres  because  he  never  was  seised  of  ihem,  for  that  tenement 
i  the  inheritance  of  his,  John's,  wife,  and  all  the  ancestors  of 
I  John's  wife  have  always  held  that  tenement  As  for  the  dyke, 
1  they  say  {sic)  that  it  was  raised  by  common  assent  of  the  whole 
'  country,  and  for  the  protection  of  the  country  against  inundation, 
and  as  well  on  hrs  own  soil  as  on  that  of  others  of  the  country. 
Touching  the  weir,  he  says  that  he  has  raised  {Ici^avif)  nothing 
in  Saltelond  in  other  manner  than  li  wm  i.ii^ed  in  the  time  of 
William  Paynol  the  younger,  .n  ■: 
no  weir  on  the  ttntment  uf  \\ 
assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  11 
disseise  the  said  William  of  the  l*.  .-■ 
the  ciop  of  this  autumn.    Cuncc 


410  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Saltemore,  they  say  that  John  inclosed  that  land  with  a  dyke  to 
the  injury  of  the  said  William.  As  to  the  weir,  they  say  that 
he  [John]  raised  the  weir  afresh  {Icvavit  gurgitem  de  novo)  on 
William's  land,  wherefore  they  say  that  John  did  disseise 
William.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William  should  recover 
his  seisin  by  view  of  the  jurors,  and  that  the  dyke  nuisance 
should  be  thrown  down.  As  to  the  weir,  they  say  that  he 
restored  it  on  the  land  of  William  to  the  length  of  one  perch 
and  one  foot  in  width.  Therefore  let  it  be  thrown  down  at  the 
cost  of  John,  and  let  it  be  made  as  it  was  wont  and  ought  to  be, 
by  view  of  the  recognitors.  And  John  is  in  mercy.  Damages, 
5  J.  Concerning  the  watercourse,  William  says  that  John  diverted 
the  watercourse  of  Loghescros,  which  used  to  run  to  his  [William's] 
fishery,  where  he  was  accustomed  to  fish,  and  have  half  the  fish 
as  far  as  Lodcspill.  John  comes,  and  says  that  he  has  not 
diverted  that  watercourse  in  any  other  way  than  [to  cause  it 
to  run  as]  it  was  wont  to  run  by  the  common  provision  {per 
communem  provisionem)  of  the  whole  country.  William,  by  his 
attorney,  says  that  John  diverted  that  watercourse  of  his  own 
authority,  and  to  the  injury  of  him,  William,  and  not  by  the 
common  providence  of  the  country,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  John  did 
divert  the  said  watercourse  to  the  injury  of  Walter.  Therefore 
it  is  considered  that  the  nuisance  should  be  abated,  and  that 
the  watercourse  should  be  made  as  it  was  wont  and  ought 
to  be  by  view  of  the  recognitors,  and  John  is  in  mercy.  And 
be  it  known  that  Ralph  Lawe,  one  of  the  disseisors,  did  not 
come,  but  he  found  pledges.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  are 
in  mercy,  by  [pledge]  of  William  Elyot  and  Walter  Scvel. 
Afterwards  John  came  and  made  fine  for  his  men  for  20s, 
And  he  [must  be  dealt  with]  at  the  Exchequer  for  his  many 
disseisins^  {et  ipse  ab  scaccarium  pro  pluribus  disseisinis). 

Memb.  15. 

1453.  Our  lord  the  King  notified  Henry  de  Bracton  by  his  writ 
that  William  de  Marisco  has  before  him  attorned  in  his  place 
Thomas  le  Veyl  or  Alexander  de  Heygton*,  or  either  of  them, 
to  gain  or  to  lose  on  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin  which  William 


'  I  take  this  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  which  is  unusual.    '*  ad  scaeatnum 

in  the  margin. 


w 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


411 


has  arraigned  against  John  dc  Ballun  concerning  a  tenement  in 
Hunespiir,  and  on  the  assize  which  the  same  William  has 
arrai£ned  against  the  same  John  concerning  ihe  diversion  of 
a  watercourse  in  the  same  vill,  and  on  the  assize  which  the 
same  William  has  arraigned  against  the  same  John  touching 
a  certain  road  in  the  same  vill,  etc. 

ATanb.  \6. 
Assizes  taken  at  Pederton  on  the  morrow  of  the  close  of  Easter,' 
in  the  thirty-seventh  year,  before  H[enry]  dc  Bracton,  Hugh 
Fichet,  and  Geoifry  dc  Lawerton'  his  companions,  etc, 

1454.  The  assize  conies  to  recognise  whether  Robert,  Abbot 
of  Alingenye^  and  Sabina  del  Oriyay  unjustly,  etc.  disseised 
Walter  Corbyn  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Litlcmorc,  which 
appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  la  I.adc,  since  the  first,  etc. 
Afterwards  Walter  came  and  withdrew  himself.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit  John  dc  Bugcford'  and 
Henry  Lud,  arc  in  mercy.  It  was  agreed  between  them  that 
lady  Sabina  should  grant  to  the  said  Walter  two  acres  of 
meadow  in  Litlcmor',  nearest  to  the  meadow  of  the  Abbot  of 
Alingeny,  but  so  that  when  the  said  Sabina  should  mow  her 
meadow  the  said  Walter  should  mow  his,  and  as  she  should 
depasture  her  meadow  so  Weaker  should  be  allowed  to  de- 
pasture his,  with  free  ingress  and  egress.  And  be  it  known 
that  the  Abbot  ought  to  warrant  to  the  said  Sabina  the  whole 
of  the  said  meadow  of  Litlemore  against  all  his  men  of  Sutton, 
and  similarly  the  said  Sabina  ought  to  warrant,  for  heisclf  and 
all  her  men  of  la  Lade,  the  said  Abbot  and  his  successors. 

1455.  And  be  it  known  that  Robert  dc  Sanclo  Claro,  Thomas 
de  Bradel',  William  de  Spekelon',  Robert  le  Frankelcyn,  John 
le  Norcys,  and  Robert  dc  Bernevill',  Jurors,  did  not  come. 
Therefore  they  are  in  mercy.  The  amercement  of  Robert 
de  Sancto  Claro.  2ar.  The  amercement  of  Thomas,  20s.  The 
amercement  of  William,  I  mark,  The  amercement  of  Robert 
Ic  Frankeleyn,  ^  mark.  The  amercement  of  John,  J  mark. 
The  amercement  of  Robert  de  Barncvill',  2qs. 


■  Thf  fatikt  ttmuum  wu  the  SuDdir  *lLa  Eaua  DtV,  ■)» 
*  Atbcinqr. 


412  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Memb.  i6d. 
1456.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  Wasun, 
Richard  de  Wroxal,  Martin  de  Leye,  Roger  Brun,  Thomas 
Russel,  Roger  Basset,  Walter  Ordalf,  Philip  Wodereve,  Robert 
de  Rakedcswory,  William  le  Teinterer,  Roger  the  fisherman 
(piscator),  Walter  the  tailor  {parmenter)^  Gilbert  the  tailor, 
Richard  le  Kyng  of  Briges,  John  de  Everleye,  Stephen  Cissor, 
Adam  de  la  Feld,  William  de  Dudesham,  and  Henry  le  Petit, 
unjustly,  etc.  diverted  a  certain  watercourse  in  Enemere*  to  the 
injury  of  the  free  tenement  of  William  Malet  in  the  same  [vill], 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  [William]  says  that  he  was  in 
good  and  peaceful  seisin  of  that  watercourse  as  a  water  leat 
{waterletani)  to  his  land  of  Enemcre'  until  the  said  Richard  and  the 
others  unjustly  disseised  him  thereof,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself 
upon  the  assize.  Richard  Wasun  and  all  the  others  come,  except 
Henry  le  Petit,  who  is  not  known  and  was  not  attached,  because 
not  found,  and  they  say  that  they  have  not  disseised  the  said 
William  of  that  watercourse  unjustly,  because  William  Briwer  was 
seised  thereof,  and  after  him  William  de  Cantelupo  the  elder  in 
name  of  custody,  so  that  when  the  same  William  Malet  obstructed 
that  water[course]  the  said  William  Briwer  caused  the  dam  to 
be  broken  down  and  the  water  to  flow  in  its  proper  channel. 
Moreover,  they  say  that  the  watercourse  is  not  in  Evemere, 
but  is  in  Lekeworth,  and  that  the  said  William  Briwer  and 
William  de  Cantelupo  were  in  seisin  of  the  watercourse ;  and 
that  the  said  William  Malet  never  had  peaceful  seisin  there, 
they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize,  and  William  Malet  [does] 
likewise.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  watercourse, 
touching  which  the  said  William  complains,  is  in  Evemere  and 
not  in  Lokesworth,  and  they  say  positively  that  in  truth  William 
Briwerr'  did  his  will  with  many  folk,  and  if  they  did  anything 
there  to  divert  the  said  water  it  was  [done]  unjustly,  and  by  his 
force,  because  all  the  ancestors  of  William  Malet  were  in  seisin 
of  that  watercourse  as  a  waterlcat  to  his  land  of  Enemere,  and 
he,  William,  after  them  [was]  for  nearly  thirty  years  in  good  and 
peaceful  seisin  until  the  said  Richard  Wasun  and  all  the  others, 
except  Martin  de  Leye,  unjustly  disseised  him.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  William  Malet  should  recover  his  seisin  by  view 
of  the  jurors,  and  Richard  Wasun  and  all  the  others,  except  the 
said  Martin,  are  in  mercy.     Damages,  \os, 

^  Enmorc.  '  Here  there  is  an  interlineation  *'/.  xxx  "a*or  thirty  years. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  413 

Memb  17. 

1457.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  WiUiam  de 
Whetedon',  father  of  Avice  de  Whetedon',  was  seised  in  his 
demesne,  etc.  of  one-third  part  of  the  manor  of  Wheteden',  with 
the  appurtenances,  on  the  day  on  which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc., 
which  third  part  Robert  de  Wheteden  holds,  who  comes  and 
vouches  to  warranty  Reginald  de  Mohun,  by  whom  and  by 
whose  charter  he  was  enfeoffed.  Afterwards  Robert  came  and 
recognised  the  whole  of  the  said  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
to  be  the  right  of  Avice  as  that  of  which  William,  the  father  of 
Avice,  was  seised  on  the  day  on  which  he  set  out  for  the  Holy 
Land,  and  gave  it  up  to  her  in  the  same  court  to  hold  and  to 
have  to  her  and  her  heirs  of  the  said  Robert  and  his  heirs  for 
ever,  paying  annually  therefor  I2d,  at  the  feast  of  St.  Michael, 
and  doing  such  forinsec  service  as  should  belong  to  the  land. 
And  be  it  known  that  the  said  Robert  took  the  homage  of  the 
said  Avice  for  the  land  in  the  same  court.  The  sheriff  is  ordered 
that  he  should  cause  her  to  have  her  seisin  by  view  of  the 
jurors. 

1458.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Humphrey  de 
Almeneford*,  father  of  Hugh,  was  seised,  etc.  of  one  messuage 
and  five  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Almeneford', 
on  the  day  on  which,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  messuage 
and  which  land  Margery  daughter  of  Iseult  holds,  who  comes 
and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made  because  the  said 
Humphrey  de  Almcneford'  enfeoffed  her  of  the  said  lands  and 
messuage  one  year  or  more  before  his  death,  and  by  his  charter 
which  she  proffers,  and  which  testifies  this.  Hugh,  by  his 
attorney,  comes,  and  fully  admits  the  charter  and  feoffment,  and 
[saysj  that  that  ought  not  to  hurt  him,  because  the  said 
Humphrey,  after  that  charter  and  feoffment,  died  seised  thereof, 
and  that  he,  after  that  gift,  never  changed  his  state,  but  dealt 
with  the  land  and  houses  as  he  had  done  before  that  gift,  and 
thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Margery  says  that  the 
said  Humphrey  did  not  die  seised  of  the  said  land  and  messuage, 
for  immediately  after  the  gift  Humphrey  gave  her  as  guardian 
one  Walter  Marescall  by  name,  who  took  the  profits  of  the  said 
land  to  the  use  of  Margery ;  and  that  Humphrey,  after  the  gift, 
had  nothing  in  the  said  land  otherwise  than  by  the  said  guardian 
and  by  the  said  Margery  {tiisi  per  predictum  custodem  it  per 


414  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

predictatn  Margeriafn\  and  thereon  she  puts  herself  upon  the 
assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  said  Humphrey 
did  not  die  seised  of  the  said  land  and  messuage,  for  in  truth 
after  he  gave  the  land  to  Margery  he  had  nothing  in  the  said 
land  otherwise  than  by  the  said  custody,  and  in  the  name  of 
Margery.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Margery  [may  go] 
quit,  and  that  Hugh  should  take  nothing  by  this  assize,  but 
should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.     He  is  a  pauper. 

1459.  Thomas  de  Bellocampo,  [who  is]  beyond  the  sea, 
against  William  de  Curtcnay,  on  a  plea  of  land  whereon  an 
assize  of  mort  d*ancestor  [is  sought] ;  on  the  morrow  of  St 
Martin  at  London.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.*  On  that  day 
came  William,  by  his  attorney,  and  craved  leave  to  withdraw 
from  his  writ,  and  he  has  it.  Therefore  Thomas  [may  go] 
quit. 

1460.  The  same  William  craved  leave  to  withdraw  from  his 
writ  against  Agnes,  formerly  the  wife  of  Thomas  de  Verdun', 
concerning  one  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
Jedelesworth',  and  he  has  it  because  she  no  longer  holds  [the 
land]. 

Mevib.  ijd. 

Assizes  taken  at  Lambeth*,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton,  on  the 
day  of  the  Blessed  Katharine  the  virgin,  in  the  thirty-eighth 
year. 

1461.  Peter,  Abbot  of  Keynesham,  puts  in  his  place  John  de 
Norton'  or  Robert  the  messenger  (nuftcius)  against  Bartholomew 
de  Emncberg'  on  a  plea  that  he  should  permit  them  {sic)  to 
have  common  of  pasture,  etc. 

1462.  Cecily,  formerly  the  wife  of  Benedict  de  Bere,  puts  in 
her  place  Robert  de  Wolmerston'  or  Jordan  Br  .  .  .  against 
.  .  .  na,  formerly  the  wife  of  Vincent  de  Herdecot*,  on  a  plea 
of  dower. 

Menib.  18. 

1463. 

Alan  de  Wodebrug',  juror,  for  default ...  Haifa  mark. 

Roger  le  Porter,  for  the  same                ...  Haifa  mark. 

Richard  de  Wytcherch,  for  the  same    ...  Half  a  mark. 

^  The  words  following  this  essoin  were  of  course  written  later. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


4IS 


Gervase  de  Halton,  for  the  same 
Richard  de  Stancumb',  for  disseisin 
Walter  de  Chippel',  for  the  same 
Nicholas  de  Bosco,  for  the  same 
Thomas  de  Ramesden,  for  disseisin 
Robert  de  Helyun,  for  the  same 
Richard  de  CunteviU',  one  of  the  jurors, 

for  default 
John  la  Ware,  for  disseisin 
Edith  de  Draycot'  and  Henry  her  son, 

for  the  same 
Richard  de  la  Halle  and  Stephen  son 

of  Edith,  for  the  same 
Reginald  le  Lung,  juror,  for  default 
Martin  le  Cumb'  and  Hugh  de  Holde- 

land,  for  the  same 
Godfrey  de  Alneto,  his  fine  for  disseisin. . . 


I  mark. 
20s. 

I  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 
I  mark. 

1  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 

2  marks. 
Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 

Half  a  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 

5  marks. 


Memb.  iSd. 


T  mark. 
Half  a  mark. 


5  marks. 

30s, 

Half  a  mark. 


William  son  of  William,  for  disseisin    ... 
Robert  de  Burcy,  his  fine  for  his  false 

claim 
Richard  Luvel,  his  fine  for  disseisin 
William  de  Boleviir,  his  fine  for  disseisin 
Robert    Ode,   Richard   de   Kyngestan', 

jurors,  for  default 
Roger  de   Cruce   of    Sevenhampt*   and     Half  a  mark. 

Nicholas   de   Lopene,  jurors,  for   the 

same 
Roger  de  Stratton  and  Thomas  le  Os- 

triser,  jurors,  for  the  same 
Gervase  de  Halton,  James  Corbet,  Robert 

de  Dene,  Hugh  le  Tayllur,  and  William 

de  Sullye,  their  fine  for  disseisin  20J.,  of 

which  Gervase  ^  mark,  James  Corbet 

and  Robert  de  Dene  ^  mark,  Hugh 

le   Tayllur    and    William   de   Sullye 

^  mark« 
William  Marescair,  for  himself  and  his 

men,  fine  for  disseisin 


Half  a  mark. 


I  mark. 


4l6  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Robert  de  Barevill,  for  his  false  claim     20s. 

against  Osmund,  parson  of  Cynnok, 

and  others 
Thomas  de  Regny,  for  disseisin  ...     40s, 

Thomas  de  Cumb',  his  fine  for  himself     i  mark 

and  his  pledges  because  he  did   not 

prosecute 
Christiana  Luvel,  William  de  Karevill', 

their  fine  for  themselves  and  their  men 

for  disseisin  lOOs.,  whereof  Christiana 

50J.  and  William  50?. 
William  Haket,  for  disseisin  ...     5  marks. 


Memb,  19. 

1464.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Haket 
and  Alan  son  of  Walter  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Clement  de 
Aghambo  and  Joan  his  wife  of  their  free  tenement  in  Little 
Merston,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that 
they  disseised  them  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  the  same  vill.  William  comes  and  confesses  the 
disseisin  ;  therefore  let  him  be  in  custody.  It  is  considered 
that  Clement  and  Joan  should  recover  their  seisin.  William 
recognises  that  he  will  give  Clement  and  Joan  5  marks,  whereof 
he  will  pay  to  them  3  marks  in  fifteen  days  from  the  morrow  of 
the  Assumption  of  the  Blessed  Mary;  and  if  he  should  not  pay 
he  grants  that  the  sheriff  may  raise  the  money  on  [his]  lands, 
etc.,  together  with  costs  {simul  cum  custo\  etc.,  and  he  will  pay 
2  marks  to  our  lord  the  King  for  the  said  Clement  and  Joan 
on  summons  of  the  exchequer  {ad  sum  Scfcrii). 

Memh.  igd. 

1465.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Stancumb', Walter  dc  Chippelcg', and  Nicholas  de  Bosco  unjustly, 
etc  disseised  Hugh  le  Lung  and  Gunilda  his  wife  of  their  free 
tenement  in  Langeford',  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is 

^  These  figures,  which  are  obviously  inaccurate,  are  in  accord  with  those  on  the 
roll.     There  has,  however,  been  some  alteration  in  placcb  which  may  account  lor  the 
mistake. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


4'7 


complained  that  they  disseised  them  of  seven  acres  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances,  Richard,  Walter,  and  Nicholas  come,  and  say 
that  they  [Hugh  and  Gunilda]  could  not  be  disseised  because 
they  never  were  seised  and  thereon  they  put  themselves  upon 
the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that  Richard,  Walter,  and  Nicholas 
did  disseise  the  said  Hugh  and  Gunilda  as  the  writ  says. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Hugh  and  Gunilda  should  recover 
their  seisin,  and  Richard,  Walter,  and  Nicholas  are  in  mercy. 
Damages,  ^  mark. 

1466,  The  assise  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  dc 
Ramesden'  and  Isabella  his  wife,  Robert  de  Helyun,  William  de 
Hclyun,  Nicholas  de  StawelT,  and  Peter  de  Tokeswell'  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  Thomas  son  of  Simon  of  his  free  tenement  in 
Suthbrente  and  Berwcs,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is 
complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  three  acres  of  land  in 
Suthbrente,  and  of  a  fourth  part  of  one  acre  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Bcrwcs.  Thomas  does  not  come,  nor  Robert 
de  Heluin,  nor  William  of  the  same  of  the  county  of  Devon,  but 
his  bailiff  comes,  and  says  nothing  wherefor  the  as.-^ize  should 
remain.  The  jurors  say  that  the  said  Thomas  de  Ramesden' 
and  all  the  others  did  disseise  the  said  Thomas  son  of  Simon,  as 
the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Thomas  should 
recover  his  seisin,  and  Thomas  de  Ramesden'  and  all  the  others 
are  in  mercy.  Damages,  ^  mark.  Richard  de  Cuntevill  and 
Roger  de  Plcybir',' jurors,  did  not  come;  therefore  they  are  in 
mercy. 

1467.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  la  Ware, 
Edith  de  Draycot',  Henry  her  son,  Stephen  son  of  Edith,  and 
Richard  de  la  Halle  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Sybil  dc  Golcmore 
of  her  free  tenement  in  Draycot',  since  the  first,  etc..  and  whereon 
it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  her  of  a  certain  dyke.  John 
and  the  others  come,  and  John  says  that  they  have  not  disseised 
her  of  any  dyke,  because  the  dyke  of  which  complaint  is  made  is 
his, and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  thcassize.  The  jurors  say 
that  John  and  the  others  did  disseise  the  said  Sybil,  as  the  writ 
say's.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  she  shoLiM  n_-ci>vcr  her 
seisin,  and  John  and  the  others  are  in  m<i'  ^  .1. 
And  Martin  de  Cumb',  Reginald  le  Lung,  [!i;  !, 
jurors,  did  not  come  ;  therefore  they  are  in  im- 1 


rtiutti'-faiifti 


41 8  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

1468.  The  assize  between  Robert  de  Edinton',  querent,  and 
Geoffry  de  Chanton*  and  certain  others,  concerning  a  tenement 
in  Edington,  is  put  in  respite  until  another  time  to  be  appointed 
by  our  lord  H[enry]  de  Bracton,  because  the  tenement  of  which 
complaint  is  made  is  so  covered  by  water  that  a  view  cannot  be 
made.  In  the  meantime  let  the  view  be  made.  And  let  the 
sheriff  add  so  many  and  such,  whether  knights  or  others,  so  that 
the  assize  may  not  remain,^  etc. 

1469.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise,  before  our  lord  H[enry] 
de  Bracton  and  Thomas  de  Ha  .  .  .  ,  whether  Godfrey  de 
Alneto  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  the  Prior  of  Bath  of  his  free  tene- 
ment in  Cumpton',  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  he  disseised  him  of  20s.  of  rent  in  the  same  vill. 
Geoffry  (sic)  does  not  come,  but  his  bailiff  comes  and  confesses,  on 
behalf  of  his  lord,  the  disseisin.  It  is  considered  that  the  Prior 
should  recover  his  seisin  [and  damages  taxed  ....  at 
.     .     .     *],  and  Godfrey  is  in  mercy.     Damages,  .  .  .  mark. 

Memb,  20. 

1470.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  de 
Reyngny,  Ralph  Godwyne,  and  Robert  de  Bukebur*  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  Roger  Kyng  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Sire- 
deston',  which  appertains  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  the  common  of  pasture  which  he  and  his 
ancestors  have  always  had  in  the  wood  of  Haddon'  and  Haddel 
until  they  disseised  him.  Thomas  comes,  and  says  that  he 
[Roger]  ought  not  to  have  any  common  there,  nor  had  he  ever 
any  otherwise  than  by  favour  and  by  agreement,  and  thereon  he 
puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that  the  said 
Thomas  and  all  the  others  did  disseise  him  of  the  said  common, 
as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Roger  should 
recover  his  seisin,  and  Thomas  and  all  the  others  are  in  mercy. 
Damages,  35". 

147 1.  Thomas  de  Cumb\  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Thomas  de  Tynho,  Thomas  de  Kantford*,  and 
others,  concerning  a  tenement  in  Litleton'  and  Tynho,  does  not 
proceed.      Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  to  wit, 

'  That  is,  for  the  want  of  the  proper  number  of  jurors. 
^  This  is  interlined. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  419 

William  de  Cumb  of  Howeton'  and  Roger  Tyrel  of  Childe- 
cumpton,  are  in  mercy. 

1472.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Christiana 
Luvel,  Peter  de  la  Mare,  William  de  Pomcray,  William  de 
Kareviir,  Robert  Revel,  Thomas  le  Holte,  Roger  Pinnok  of 
Bruton',  Roger  Wanclin,  and  Roger  Caperun  unjustly,  etc. 
disseised  Agnes  de  Tringham  of  her  free  tenement  in  Dychene- 
stone,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  her  of  eight  acres  of  meadow,  etc.  Christiana  and  all 
the  others  come  and  admit  the  disseisin.  Therefore  let  them  be 
in  custody.  Afterwards  they  made  fine  for  themselves  and  their 
men  for  locxr.,  of  which  Christiana  SOJ.,and  William  de  Karevill' 
50J.     Damages,  40s. 

1473.  Agatha  de  Mersy  puts  in  her  place  John  de  Gatton* 
or  William  Michel  against  Geoffry  de  Brideport  on  a  plea  of 
warranty  of  charter,  etc. 

1474.  The  Prioress  of  Bocland'  puts  in  her  place  Richard 
Sherpe  to  sue,  together  with  Adam  Payn,  who  before,  etc., 
against  Henry  de  Tracy  on  a  plea  why  she  should  not  permit 
[him]  to  take  sand,  and  she  removes  William  de  la  Weye  whom 
before,^  etc. 

Memb.  21. 

1475.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Stephen  de 
Astun,  Oliver  his  brother,  Luke  Attenorchard,  Robert  Skirwyn', 
Walter  Skirwyn,  Alexander  de  Ya,  and  Robert  de  Ya  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  Robert  de  Burcy  of  his  free  tenement  in  Orcheyrd*, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  two  acres  of  meadow.  Stephen  comes  and  fully 
admits  that  he  gave  the  said  meadow  to  the  said  Robert  by  his 
charter  which  he  made  to  him  ;  but  while  there  were  certain 
bounds  between  Stephen's  meadow  and  the  meadow  of  Robert, 
the  same  Robert  came  and  occupied  [a  part]  of  Stephen's 
meadow,  one  perch  in  breadth  and  twenty-three  perches  in 
length  ;  and  when  Stephen  saw  that  Robert  had  occupied  his 
meadow,  and  would  mow  it,  and  gather  therefrom  with  his 
own  meadow,  he,  Stephen,  came  there  with  his  men  and  carried 
off  the  whole  of  the  hay  as  well  of  Robert's  meadow  as  of  his 
own  ;  and  because  Stephen  admits  this,  it  is  considered  that 
Robert  should   recover  his  seisin,  and  Stephen  and  the  others 

*  An  attorney  for  her. 


420  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

are  in  mercy.  Afterwards  he  made  fine  for  himself  and  the 
others,  his  men,  for  i  mark  for  the  disseisin.  The  jurors  say, 
in  the  manner  of  a  jury,  touching  the  occupation,  that  after  the 
said  acres  were  bounded  between  them,  Robert  occupied  of 
Stephen's  meadow  about  one  perch  in  width  and  about  eighteen 
perches  in  length.  Therefore  Robert  is  in  mercy  for  the  occu- 
pation and  for  his  false  claim.     Damages,  4s, 

1476.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  Luvel 
unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Walter  de  Bradel*,  parson  of  the  church 
of  Almanesford',  of  his  common  of  pasture  in  Alemanesford*, 
which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free  tenement  in  the  same  vill, 
since  the  first,  etc.  Richard  comes  and  admits  the  disseisin. 
Therefore  let  him  be  in  custody.  Afterwards  he  came  and 
made  fine  for  5  marks. 

1477.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Boneviir  and  Thomas  Mogge  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Robert, 
parson  of  the  church  of  Sevenhampton*,  of  his  common  of 
pasture  in  Dunington',  which  is  appurtenant  to  his  free  tenement 
in  the  same  vill,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained 
that  they  disseised  him  of  pasture  for  six  oxen  (boves)^  forty 
sheep,  and  one  horse  {affruniS)  in  his  [William's]  fallows  and 
meadows,  after  the  hay  is  carried,  where  he  was  always  wont  to 
have  common  with  William's  cattle  without  hindrance.  William 
comes,  and  alleges  nothing  wherefor  the  assize  should  remain. 
The  jurors  say  that  William  did  disseise  Robert  of  the  said 
common  as  the  writ  says,  and  because  his  [Robert's]  prede- 
cessor was  is  in  seisin  of  the  same  common  for  six  oxen,  forty 
sheep,  and  one  horse,  and  he,  Robert,  afterwards  in  the  fallows 
and  meadows,  after  the  hay  was  taken,  with  the  oxen  of  William 
until  the  same  William  disseised  him  ;  therefore  it  is  considered 
that  Robert  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  William  is  in  mercy. 
Afterwards  it  is  proved  {convictum  est)  by  the  jurors  that 
[William]  took  Robert's  oxen  and  made  them  plough  his 
land,  and  held  them  until  now.  Therefore  [he  is]  in  greater 
mercy  {fnisericordia  gravior).  William's  pledges  for  his  amerce- 
ment, John  de  Berewe  and  William  Briz  of  Blakeford.  After- 
wards he  made  fine  for  30J.  And  be  it  known  that  Roger 
de   Horton',*   Roger    de    Blokes  worth,*   Osbert    de    Barinton,* 

*  Ajfrus  is  an  ox,  or  hon^e,  for  farm  work. 

*  Over  this  name  is  written  "  infirmm,  *    The  name  is  also  underlined 
'  Over  this  name  is  **  nonfuit  in  patria,^'* 

^  This  name  is  also  underlined. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  42 1 

Robert  Hude,  Richard  de  Kyngeston',  Roger  de  Cruce  of 
Sevenhampton,  Nicholas  the  clerk  of  Lapene,  Hugh  de  Bruges, 
Roger  de  Stratton,  and  Thomas  le  Ostricer,  jurors,  have  not 
come  ;  therefore  they  are  in  mercy.     Damages,  40s. 

1478.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Gervase  de 
Halton,  James  Corbet,  Robert  le  Den*,  Hugh  le  Tayllur,  and 
William  de  Sullye  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Nicholas  Michel  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Norcheriton,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon 
it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  six  acres  of  land 
which  he  had  of  the  gift  of  Ralph  Huse  and  by  his  charter, 
and  whereon  he  says  that  he  was  in  seisin  of  the  same  land 
from  Sunday  next  after  the  octave  of  Epiphany  in  the  thirty- 
third  year  until  Ash  Wednesday  (ad  diem  Cyneruvt)  until  the 
said  Gervase  and  the  others  disseised  him,  and  thereon  he  puts 
himself  upon  the  assize.  Gervase  and  all  the  others  come,  and 
say  that  they  have  not  disseised  Nicholas  of  any  free  tenement, 
because  they  are  in  seisin  of  the  same,  and  they  were  seised 
thereof  for  a  long  time  before  that  gift  was  made  to  Nicholas  ; 
and  that  Nicholas  was  never  in  seisin  by  that  gift  they  put 
themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that  the  soil  touching 
which  Nicholas  complains  belonged  to  one  Ralph  Huse,  who 
gave  that  land  to  the  said  Nicholas,  and  by  his  charter  enfeoffed 
him  thereof,  and  the  same  Nicholas  was  for  a  long  time  in 
seisin  b)'  that  gift,  for  he  took  it  into  his  hand  and  raised  a 
dyke  without  any  opposition  or  hindrance  until  Gervase  and 
the  others  disseised  him  thereof.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  Nicholas  should  recover  his  seisin  by  view  of  the  jurors, 
and  Gervase  and  the  others  are  in  mercy.  They  made  fine  for 
the  amercement  for  20s.,  and  each  of  them  by  pledge  of  the 
other,  of  which  Gervase  \  mark,  James  Corbet  and  Robert  de 
Dene  i  mark,  Hugh  de  Tayllur  and  William  de  Sulleye  \  mark. 
Damages,  \2d. 

1479.  The  assize  comes   to  recognise  whether  William  Ic 
Marescal    [and]    Stephen    le    Messer    unjustly,   etc.   disseised 
Stephen  de  Greneweye,  Alice   his   wife,  and    Agnes  sister  o 
Alice,  of  their  free  tenement  in  Preston',  since  the  first,  et 
and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  them  of  thi 
ferlings  of  land,  etc     William  does  not  come,  but  his  be 
comes,  and  admits  for  his  lord  that  Stephen  and  the  ol 
were  enfeoffed  of  the  said  land  by  a  certain  lady  wb* 

that  land  in  dower,  and  confesses  the  disseisin.    The 


422  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


is  considered  that  Stephen  and  the  others  should  recover 
their  seisin,  and  William  and  Stephen  [le  Messer]  are  in  mercy. 
Stephen  and  the  others  release  {rcmittunt)  to  the  said  William 
and  Stephen  le  Messer  their  disseisin.  Afterwards  they  made 
fine  for  i  mark. 
148a 

The  next  entry  is  almost  entirely  ill^ble.  It  would  seem  that  one  Agatha 
admittei)  liefvMre  Henry  de  Bracton,  John  de  Aore,  Geofir>*  de  .  .  .  ,  the  paisoQ 
of  l>yche*hete,  whose  nanie  is  K\st,  ihe  Prior  of  the  Hospital  of  St.  Jchn  of  Wells, 
ami  other*,  that  she  gave  to  some  person  of  Wells  [Geoftry  le  Diaper?]  a  manor, 
the  name  of  which  cannot  be  read.  Moreover,  a  portion  of  the  membrane  has 
iMTcn  torn  olf. 


Mtmh  2\d. 

1481.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Geoffry  dc 
Mantieviir  unjustly  disseised  Marger}\  daughter  of  Benedict 
de  Estcoker,  of  her  free  tenement  in  Elstcoker,  since  the  first, 
etc*^  and  whereon  it  is  a>mplained  that  he  disseised  her  of  one 
vir^tc  of  land«  with  the  appurtenances,  out  of  {crtra)  one  acre 
aivi  a-half  of  land  and  one  acre  of  meadow,  etc  Geoffirv*  docs 
not  c\i»n>e»  but  JcAn  Pioot  his  bailiff  comes^  and  sa\"s  that  the 
said  Marger\-  \\*as  no>t  in  seisin  of  the  said  [land],  so  that  she 
cxHild  be  disseised,  because  she  and  Gerard  Constantin.  formeriv 
her  husband,  enfeoffed  one  Ralph  le  Albe  her  son  of  the  said 
Und,  and  bv  their  charter,  and  he  sa\-s  that  Geofm-  his  \fxd 
cUinis  nothing  in  that  tenement  bej'ond  custody,  and  Margciy 
CJtttnot  denv  this.  Theiehxe  it  is  considered  that  Mar^jerr 
shcHiId  take  nothin<:  bv  this  assire,  but  shculd  be  in  nscrcv  ibr 
her  tjdse  olaioL  She  is  a  pauper,  and  is  pardocec  ibr  Goes saikc 
And  the  King's  (/»v  A\*  ^:/rv  Ri^x. 

l^S'Z^  The  jurL>r5v  by  ocvier  oi  o«r  lord  the  King;,  crtrse  ^^ 
nrw^nise  by  Richard  k  Noce\^  SiiiKJO  tbe  painter  /^£:s/FT«r*^ 
WjiUer  Hubenl^  John  Ansoce,  John  de  Wyrrrc".  R5criire  c5e 
Lo«k:\  Georni*  le  Feoir.  W  illiim  Car»jctar\  "Hiccas  oe  Wcoe- 
lbcvi\  loha  l>i:<5Xti?ar\  Rkrhiri  ce  Merkesbtr*.  arrc  Kilrc:  Bars?- 
cci.  >iibo  say  u^>q  their  cjith  thjit  Mxscer  Jchr!  ce  Kik,  w^rea:  Sie 
cvj&ie  a  certjdr^  gin  ro  W  ill  jlt:  Fxhet  cf  certirr  Lini  nr  r'tf-iciiL 
^  JL>  o<  ?CiLasX  trirtc  arc  ^'.xxi  n^eraoo-.  althcc:;^:^:  i-i~r.  ir»i  r^^ar 
be  c^JfcxX^  thj^t  c^  ^-^  — ^  sarie  WiZiin  cc  tbe  ncrrrw^  ct 
S^  l^bccjES  thse  A^^:<c"e  t^ii^  year,  asjc  aiters:!^^  H-r^i  3Ed 
Tiflcsvixv  cit^t  ;sLKer   t!::e  Cirocncssacc^  a::*!   tinjr    in:ii  az   :» 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  423 

third  hour  of  the  day,  and  that  he  had  good  memory  always 
until  the  end  of  his  life. 

1483.  Richard  Luvel  admits  before  the  justices  that  he  gave, 
and  by  his  charter  confirmed,  to  God  and  the  church  of  St. 
Andrew  of  Almanesford',  and  to  Walter  de  Bradeleg',  rector 
{rector')  of  the  same  church  in  pure,  etc.,  eight  acres  of  arable 
land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  field  called  Estfeld  next 

the  wood  of  Almenesford  which  one  John  H formerly 

held,  and  one  acre  and  a-half  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  the  meadow  called  Brunesham,  and  three  acres  and  a-half  of 
meadow,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  meadow  of  Karermor*, 
which  is  called  Westmor'  above  the  meadow  of  the  lady 
Christiana  Cotel',  to  have,  etc.,  to  the  said  W.  and  his  suc- 
cessors, rectors  of  the  said  church  freely,  etc.,  as,  etc.,  and  it  shall 
be  lawful  for  the  said  W.  and  his  successors,  rectors  of  the  said 
church,  to  mow  the  said  meadows,  with  the  appurtenances,  and 
to  lift  and  carry  wheresoever,  etc.,  with  free  ingress  and  egress 
without  any  dispute  or  hindrance  of  me  or  my  heirs  or  assigns 
as  in  the  charter  which  the  said  W.  has  fully  and  better  appears, 
etc.,  and  Richard  and  his  heirs  will  warrant,  etc.  the  said  W.  and 
his  successors  of  the  same  church  the  said  lands  and  meadows, 
with  the  appurtenances,  against  all  men,  etc.,  and  as,  etc. 

1484.  Agatha  de  Meisy  admits  that  she  gave  and  granted, 
and  by  her  charter  confirmed,  to  William  Michel  her  house 
(curiam  suam)  with  the  garden  and  two  acres  of  land  with  a 
certain  meadow  lying  in  Evercryz,  and  three  messuages  with 
the  curtilages  and  all  their  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill,  of 
which  Geoffry  le  Poter  held  one,  Eve  Bighorn  another,  and 
Walter  Cede  held  the  third,  to  have  and  to  hold,  etc.,  ren- 
dering therefor  yearly  one  pair  of  gloves  or  id.  at  Easter,  as  in 
the  charter,  which  the  same  William  has,  fully  appears. 

1485.  William  Michel  admits  that  he  is  bound  to  the  Prior 
of  the  Hospital  of  St.  John  of  Wells  and  of  the  brethren  there 
serving  God  in  I  silver  mark  yearly,  payable  at  four  terms  in 
the  year  as  in  the  charter,  which  the  Prior  has,  fully  appears, 
etc. 

i486.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  the 
clerk  of  Chilton  and  Thomas  Trevet  unjustly,  etc.  disseised 
Joan  de  Crandon  of  his  free  tenement  in  Krandun,  since  the 
first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  her 
of  thirty  acres  of  land  and  seven  acres  of  meadow,  with  the 


424  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill.  Thomas  comes,  and  says  that 
the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  because  she  gave  that  tenement 
to  the  said  Rrchard  the  clerk,  and  enfeoffed  him  thereof  by  her 
charter  which  he  proffers,  and  which  testifies  this,  and  moreover 
Thomas  says  that  he  has  that  tenement  of  the  gift  of  the  said 
Richard,  who  enfeoffed  him  thereof  by  his  charter,  which  he 
[ThomasJ  proffers,  and  which  testifies  this.  He  proffers  also  the 
charter  of  Joan  herself  of  quitclaim  of  the  same  land.  The 
jurors  say  that  Richard  and  Thomas  did  not  disseise  her  of  any 
free  tenement  as  she  complains.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
Joan  should  take  nothing  by  this  assize,  but  should  be  in  mercy 
for  her  false  claim.     She  is  a  pauper. 

1487.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Osmund  parson 
of  Cynnok,^  William  his  brother,  and  Philip  Seys  unjustly,  etc. 
disseised  Robert  de  Barnevill*  of  his  free  tenement  in  Cynnok, 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  half  a  virgate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances, 
in  the  same  vill.  William  and  Philip  do  not  come,  but  Osmund 
comes  and  says  that  Robert  could  not  have  there  any  free 
tenement,  because  his  [Osmund's]  church  is  seised  thereof, 
and  was     .... 

The  rest  of  so  much  of  this  entry  as  remains  is  so  illegible  that  only  a  word  or 
two  here  and  there  can  be  made  out.  A  portion  of  the  membrane  has  also  been 
torn  off. 


ROLL   No.  1 182.    (Divers  Counties.) 

This  roll  appears  to  cover  a  period  between  June,  1254  (38  Henry 
in.)  and  shortly  after  September,  1256  (41  Henry  III.).  It  is  that 
referred  to  by  Prof.  Maitland  as  "  the  precious  roll  of  assizes  taken  by 
Bracton  in  the  year  1254.'*^  It  comprises  cases  of  the  counties  of 
Somerset,  Wilts,  Devon,  Cornwall,  Gloucester,  Salop,  Oxford,  Surrey, 
Cambridge,  Stafford,  and  York.  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  the 
record  of  the  commission.  The  Patent  Rolls  are  somewhat  deficient 
for  these  years.  But  we  may  assume  that  his  commission  was  only  to 
take  the  lesser  assizes,  with  possibly  gaol  delivery,  of  which,  however, 
we  have  no  record  in  this  roll.  There  was  a  full  eyre  in  Somerset 
in  40  Henry  III.  The  commission  is  to  be  found  on  the  Patent  Roll 
for  that  year  (No.  67),  on  memb.  i6d.  The  justices  assigned  to 
hear  "  all  pleas  "  were  Gilbert  de  Preston,  Henry  de  Tracy,  Roger  de 

*  Chinnock.  .  *   Bracton's  Note  Book,  p.  4a 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


42s 


Wycestr",  William  de  Englefeld,  and  William  de  Cobeham.  The  roll 
of  this  eyre  is  not  forthcoming.  The  business  was  probably  heavy,  for 
the  number  of  fines  is  unusually  large  (see  vol.  of  "Som.  Fines"). 
They  were  all  taken  before  the  justices  above  named.  We  have  no 
record  of  fines  levied  in  the  county  in  the  38th  and  39th  years.  This 
roll  was  formerly  No.  96  amongst  the  Coram  Rege  Rolls.  The 
membranes  appear  to  have  been  re-numbered  and  re-arranged.  It 
may,  therefore,  be  convenient  to  give  side  by  side  the  old  and  new 
numbers ; — 


Present 

No. 

Old  No. 

Present 

No. 

Old  No. 

Present 

No. 

Old  No. 

Present 

No. 

Old  No. 

h 

8 

ii   i 

§ 

7 
3 

'3 
>4 
IS 

9 

The  apparent  increase  in  the  number  of  membranes  is  due  to  the 
fact  that  every  separate  piece  of  parchment,  whether  attached  to 
another  by  sewing  or  unattached,  is  now  treated  as  a  membrane. 
Membs.  3  and  8  (old  Nos.)  have  apparently  been  transposed  by 
mistake 


Memi  i 

Assizes  taken  at  Hundscham  on  Wednesday  next  after  the 
festival  of  the  exaltation  of  the  Holy  Cross,  before  H[enry]  de 
Bracton  and  his  companions,  to  wit,  Roger  Beaupcl  and  Robert 
de  Champeys,  and  others,  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  the  reign  of 
King  Henry. 

Assizes  taken  at  Morton  on  Thursday  next  after  the  exal- 
tation of  the  Holy  Cross,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton  and  his 
companions,  to  wit,  Robert  son  of  William,  Henry  de  Bodrigan, 
and  others,  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry 
(lower  down  on  the  same  membrane). 

Memb.  2. 

Assizes  taken  at  Molten  on  Sunday  next  before  the  nativity* 

of  the    Blessed    Mary,   before    II.   de    Bracton   and    Ralph   dc 
Wylinton. 

The  day  of  the  Dativitj.  .^  Ssjt 

3  I 


426  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

Assizes  taken  at  Marlebergh'  on  the  octave  of  St  Michael, 
before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his  companions,  to  wit,  Nicholas  de 
Bameflet  and  others. 

Assizes  taken  at  Exeter  on  Wednesday  next  before  the 
feast  of  St.  Gregory,^  before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his  companions, 
to  wit,  Henry  de  Tracy,  William  de  Ralegh,  and  others,  in  the 
thirty-ninth  year  of  the  King  (all  these  are  on  the  same  mem- 
brane). 

Mcftib,  2d, 

Assizes  taken  at  Benangr*  on  Sunday  next  after  the  festival  of 
St.  Michael,  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton  and  his  companions, 
to  wit 

1488.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Abbot  of 
Athinlegh'  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Eva  Talebot  of  her  free  tene- 
ment in  Bosinton*,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  he  disseised  her  of  two  parts*  of  Bosinton'  for  the 
third  part  which  was  assigned  to  her  in  dower  in  Hetfeld.  The 
Abbot  does  not  come,  but  his  bailiff  comes  and  says  that  the 
Abbot  did  not  disseise  her  of  any  free  tenement,  because  she 
never  held  the  said  land  in  demesne  ;  but,  as  he  says  is  the 
truth,  one  Lawrence  Talebot,  son  and  heir  of  Geoffry  Talebot, 
held  that  land  in  demesne  of  the  Abbot  of  Alinheye,  and  he 
gave  up  the  land  to  his  villeins  of  Bosinton*  for  an  annual  rent 
thereout  of  6  marks,  and  Lawrence  gave  up  to  her  at  his  will  the 
said  6  marks  for  her  one-third  of  Hetfeld,  so  that  at  one  time 
she  took  6  marks,  at  another  3*  for  her  one-third  part  of  Hetfeld  ; 
and  that  the  Abbot  did  not  disseise  her  of  any  free  tenement  he 
puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  come  and  say  that 
Ralph  de  Sulleworthe*  and  the  said  Eva  his  wife  formerly  held 
the  said  land  of  Bosinton'  in  demesne,  and  afteru'ards  it  was 
agreed  between  them  and  the  said  Lawrence  Talebot,  Eva's  son, 
that  they  should  give  up  to  Lawrence  the  said  tenement  of 
Bosinton'  for  6  marks  to  be  paid  to  Eva  yearly  in  the  name  of 
dower,  and  that  Lawrence  held  the  rest  of  the  said  tenement  to 

*  St.  Gregory's  day,  12  March,  1 254-5. 

'  This  means  two  parts,  or  one>half  of  6inarks,  Ralph  de  Halliwell  having  already 
disseised  her  of  the  other  two  parts,  or  40;. 

•  That  is,  after  Ralph  de  Halliwell  took  the  40J.     See  the  jurors'  version  of  the 
facts. 

^  Selworthy,  in  Caibampton  hundred ;  it  is  adjacent  to  Bossington, 


SOMERSETSHIRE    PLEAS.  427 

his  own  use  in  demesne,  and  took  all  profits  such  as  tolls  and 
others,  and  that  the  Abbot  did  not  disseise  her,  but  they  say  that 
Ralph  de  Haliweir  disseised  her  of  40s,  of  the  said  annual  rent 
of  6  marks  by  reason  of  a  certain  judgment  which  he  was  not 
able  to  claim  against  Eva's  third  part  ;  and  because  Ralph  con- 
fessed that  he  disseised  her  of  the  said  40^.,  it  is  considered  that 
Eva  should  recover  her  seisin  of  the  said  6  marks  yearly,  and  let 
Ralph  be  in  custody.  Let  Eva  be  in  mercy  for  her  false  claim 
against  the  Abbot.  She  is  a  pauper.^  Pledges  of  the  said 
Ralph  de  Haliwell :  Geoffry  de  Kytenor,  Peter  de  Gukewyll*, 
Walter  de  Fukeputte,  Michael  le  Messager,  Henry  le  Teinterer, 
and  Robert  Fichet. 

Memd,  4.* 

1489.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Agatha  de 
Kurendon*,  John  dc  Kurendon',  Walter  de  Kurendon*,  Robert  le 
Vinaz,  and  Adam  le  Sumenur  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  William 
son  of  William  de  Kurendon*  of  his  free  tenement  in  Kurendon', 
since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they 
disseised  him  of  twenty  acres  of  land  and  one  messuage,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  [vill],  and  whereof  he  says  that 
he  was  in  peaceful  seisin  by  the  gift  and  feoffment  of  Agatha 
herself  until  she  and  the  others  aforesaid  unjustly  and  without 
judgment  disseised  him.  Agatha  and  the  others  come,  and  say 
that  whatever  William  may  say  concerning  Agatha*s  charter  and 
feoffment,  he,  William,  never  was  in  seisin  of  the  said  land  and 
messuage  so  that  he  could  be  disseised,  and  as  to  this  they  put 
themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  come  and  say  upon 
their  oath  that  Agatha  enfeoffed  William  of  the  said  land  and 
messuage,  and  made  him  a  charter,  and  caused  it  to  be  read  in 
full  hundred  [court] ;  and  by  that  gift  and  feoffment  William 
was  in  peaceful  seisin  for  two  days  until  Agatha  and  all  the 
others  aforesaid  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Adam 
thereof.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  William  should  recover 
his  seisin  and  damages,  and  Agatha  and  the  others  are  in  mercy.* 

'  The  marginal  notes  *V"  and  **/;/f^'*  arc  struck  out. 

^  This  membrane  bears  the  old  number  8.  The  membranes  bearing  the  original 
numbers  3  and  8  appear  to  have  been  misplaced  ;  under  new  numbers  they  figure  as 
12  and  4  respectively. 

'  The  point  of  this  case  was  William*s  seisin.  It  was  not  disputed  that  Agatha 
had  granted  the  land  to  him  by  deed,  but  was  he  in  actual  seisin  thereunder  or  not  ? 
Agatha  seems  to  have  repented  of  her  deed,  and  she  would  have  succeeded  in  this 
action  if  the  jurors  had  not  found  that  William  had  been  put  in  seifin.     The  assise  of 


428  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

1490.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  WiUiam  de 
Pless*,  Geoffry  de  Scolande,  Thomas  Picot,  John  le  Blund, 
Hamelin  Bugu*,  and  Ranulf  de  Fynecum  unjustly,  etc.  disseised 
William  de  Munceaux  of  his  free  tenement  in  Quarem,^  since 
the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised 
him  of  thirty-seven  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
the  same  [vill],  and  whereof  he  says  he  was  in  good  and  peaceful 
seisin  as  his  inheritance  until  the  said  William  and  the  others 
unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  him.  Thomas  Picot, 
Hamelin  Bulgu',  and  Ranulf  de  Fynedon'  do  not  come,  nor 
were  they  attached  for  the  reason  that  they  were  not  found  ; 
but  William  de  Pless,  Geoffry  de  Scolande,  and  John  le  Blund 
come,  and  say  that  they  have  made  no  disseisin  because 
Richard  de  Wrotham  died  seised  thereof  as  of  his  inheritance, 
and  the  said  William,  Geoffry,  and  Thomas,  after  the  death  of 
Richard,  entered  upon  the  land  as  next  heirs  of  Richard  ;  and  as 
to  this  they  put  themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  come 
and  say  upon  their  oath  that  William  and  the  others  have  not 
disseised,  because  if  any  disseisin  was  made  it  was  made  by  one 
Richard  de  Wrotham,  and  not  by  William.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  the  said  William  and  the  others  are  quit  thereof, 
and  William  de  Muceaus  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.' 

1 49 1.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Turbcrvill,  brother  of  Roger  de  Reyni,  was  seised  in  his  demesne, 
etc.  of  one  carucate  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Dul- 
verton*,  on  the  day,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  Robert  de 
Schete  holds,  who  comes  and  says  that  the  assize  ought  not  to 
be  made,  because  shortly  before  the  death  of  Richard  the  same 
Richard  gave  that  land  to  him  [Robert]  by  the  charter  which  he 
proffers,  and  which  testifies  that  he  [Richard]  gave  all  his  land 
of  Dulverton,  with  all  its  appurtenances  and  liberties,  without 
any  reservation,  to  hold  and  to  have  to  Robert  and  his  heirs,  of 
the  said  Richard  and  his  heirs,  by  right  of  inheritance  for  ever 
by  the  service  of  one  pair  of  gloves  {cyrotecharum\  or  irf.  for 
all   services   except  royal  service,  and   [that]   Richard  and  his 

novel  disseisin,  it  will  be  remembered,  was  founded  on  possession.  It  was  a 
possessory,  not  a  proprietary,  action.  The  marginal  note  gives  the  damages  at  7j. 
and  \  mark.  In  addition  to  the  name  of  the  county,  *'  Peri  ton  **  is  written  against 
this  case  in  the  margin. 

^  Quann  Monceaux. 

^  ••  Periton  "  is  also  written  after  the  name  of  the  county,  against  this  entry.  The 
marginal  "  mia  ''  is  struck  out. 


SOMERSETSniKE  PLEAS. 


429 


heirs  will  warrant,  etc. ;  and  after  that  gift  the  same  Robert 
prosecuted  a  writ  of  warranty  of  charter  against  Richard,  and  a 
fine'  was  levied  thereon  in  the  court  of  our  lord  tlie  King,  and 
thereof  he  proffers  the  chirograph,  which  testifies  that  Richard 
recognised  the  said  manor,  with  its  appurtenances,  to  be  the 
right  of  him,  Robert,  without  any  reservation  ;  and  for  this,  etc., 
the  same  Robert  granted  the  manor,  with  its  appurtenances,  to 
Richard  and  Matilda  his  wife,  to  have  and  to  hold  to  the  same 
Richard  and  Matilda,  and  the  heirs  of  Richard,  begotten  of 
Matilda,  of  the  said  Robert  and  his  heirs  for  ever,  doing  such 
service  therefor  as  should  belong  to  the  manor  ;  and  if  the  said 
Richard  and  Matilda  should  die  without  heirs  so  begotten  as 
aforesaid,  the  manor  should  revert  to  Robert  and  his  heirs,  to 
hold  of  the  heirs  of  the  said  Richard,  for  ever  by  the  service  of 
one  pair  of  gloves  for  all  services,  and  that  Richard's  heirs  should 
warrant  and  acquit,  etc, ;  and  this  agreement  was  made  saving 
to  Robert  and  his  heirs  that  they  might  have  and  hold  the 
hundred  [court]  of  Dulvcrton  as  they  held  it  before  such  agree- 
ment was  made.  He  says  that  by  that  gift  and  fine  he  was  in 
seisin  shortly  before  the  death  of  Richard,  and  that  Richard  did 
not  die  seised  thereof  as  of  fee  unless,  according  to  the  chiro- 
graph, he  should  have  an  heir  begotten  of  Matilda,  and  he  had 
none,  so  that  he  did  not  die  seised  as  of  fee,  and  he  strictly  takes 
his  stand  upon  the  charter,  chirograph,  and  his  feoffment  without 
vouching  any  other  warranty,  and  by  that  fine  he  puts  himself  in 
seisin  after  the  death  of  Richard.  Roger  comes,  and  says  that 
whatever  Robert  may  say  about  the  feoffment  by  charter,  it 
ought  not  to  hurt  him  [Roger],  because  Richard  was  always  in 
seisin  and  never  went  out  of  sei.'iin,  but  died  seised  as  of  fee,  and 
thereon  he  claimed  the  assize.  He  says  also  that  if  any  fine  and 
chirograph  were  made  in  the  court  of  our  lord  the  King,  it  was 
deceptive,  and  the  chirograph  and  fine  were  founded  upon  a 
falsehood  in  that,  when  seeking  the  writ  he  [Robert]  informed 
the  court  of  our  lord  the  King  that  he  held  the  manor  when  he 
did  not  hold  it,  and  in  that  way  deceived  the  court,  for  which 
reason  the  fine  ought  not  to  be  valid  to  him,  and  thereon  he 
seeks  judgment,  and  also  the  [recognition  of  the]  assize  that 
Richard  died  seised  as  of  fee.  He  says  also  that  when  the  fine 
was  levied  he  put  in  his  claim.     AfterwarH*  Bnbcit  comes  and 


430  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


attorns  in  his  place  John  de  Pyridon'  or  Walter  de  Stok'  agaiost 
Roger  de  Reyny,  before  William  de  Wilton*. 

Afterwards,  at  BrugeswalterV  before  H[enry]  de  Bracton 
and  Thomas  Trevit  this]  companion,  etc.,  the  said  Roger  comes 
and  says,  as  before,  that  Richard  his  brother  died  seised  as  of 
fee,  because  he  was  always  in  seisin  by  himself  and  his  [men] 
as  he  was  before  that  gift  was  said  to  have  been  made,  and  he 
so  continued  his  seisin  until  his  death,  and  he  claimed  the 
assize  and  such  seisin  as  the  same  Richard  had.  He  concedes 
that  he  should  forego  his  claim  if  the  said  Robert  never  had 
sufficient  seisin.  Robert,  questioned  whether  he  desired  to 
stand  upon  the  fine  and  chirograph,  as  at  first  he  did,  or  to 
put  himself  upon  the  assize  on  the  question  of  his  seisin,  says 
that  so  much  confidence  has  he  in  his  seisin  that  he  willingly 
puts  himself  on  the  assize  as  to  the  sufficiency  of  his  seisin 
notwithstanding  the  fine,  and  in  such  manner  that  if  the  jurors 
should  say  that  he  had  not  sufficient  seisin  he  would  give  up 
the  tenement,  and  Roger  might  recover  his  seisin  and  he 
abandons  the  fine. 

The  jurors  say  upon  their  oaths  that  the  said  Richard  made 
his  charter  to  him  [Robert]  touching  the  said  tenement,  and 
took  his  homage  and  put  him  in  such  seisin  that  he  caused 
him  [Robert]  to  take  the  homage  of  his  free  men  and  led  him 
to  the  tenement  and  put  him  in  seisin,  so  that  they  were  together 
in  Richard's  house  for  one  night,  and  in  the  morning  they  all,  as 
well  Robert  as  Richard  and  his  wife,  withdrew  to  Robert's  land 
at  Cumbe,  and  Robert  put  his  brother  into  Richard's  house  as 
his  [Robert's]  steward,  and  when  Richard  and  his  wife  had  thus 
been  out  of  seisin  for  a  certain  time,  to  wit,  two  months,  they 
returned  and  remained  in  seisin  as  before.  Questioned  who 
remained  in  seisin  when  Richard  and  his  wife  withdrew,  they  say 
the  household  {familia)  of  Richard  and  the  servants  {servienies) 
[when  Richard  and  his  wife  withdrew^]  and  the  ploughmen  tilled 
the  lands  with  Richard's  ploughs.  Questioned  in  whose  name, 
whether  in  the  name  of  Robert  or  of  Richard,  they  say  that  they 
always  associated  that  seisin  with  the  name  of  Richard,  and  not 
with  the  name  of  Robert,  and  in  all  things  they  looked  towards 
Richard,  and  at  all  times  after  the  making  of  the  charter  and  the 

'  Bridgwater. 

*  Th's  portion  within  brackets  has  a  line  of  dots  beneath  it  in  the  original  mean- 
ing, I  take  it,  that  the  words  are  to  be  deleted 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


431 


taking  of  the  homage  until  Richard's  death.  Moreover,  Richard 
in  every  way  took  the  profits  and  never  changed  his  state,  so, 
albeit  that  Robert  once  held  some  seisin  for  some  time  all  the 
same  Richard  was  Jn  seisin,  by  himself  or  by  his  men,  and  as 
much  by  his  own  use  as  by  taking  of  profits.  Because  the  said 
Robert  and  Roger  put  themselves  upon  the  Jury  concerning  the 
seisin,  the  fine  notwithstanding,  and  Richard  never  altered  his 
condition  whether  as  to  his  use,  or  as  to  the  taking  of  profits, 
up  to  his  death,  the  jurors  say  that  Richard  died  seised  as  of  fee. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Roger  should  recover  his  seisin, 
and  Robert  is  in  mercy,  because  both  freely  put  themselves  upon 
the  jury  (/«  juratani)  touching  the  seisin  notwithstanding  the 
said  fine. 

Afterwards,  at  Westminster,  the  Jurors  summoned  to  certify' 
.  .  .  .  William  le  Brech',  William  de  Sancto  Claro,  Henry 
dc  Stauwell,  Adam  de  Scuans,  Richard  de  Cludesham,  Richard 
de  la  Plesse,  Ralph  de  Pauleshel,  William  de  Oreweyc.  Walter 
de  Subworth,  Alayn  Gubbc- ;  and  upon  this  the  record  was 
shown  by  the  said  Henry  [dc  Bracton]  acccording  as  the  assii^c 
was  taken  and  examined  before  him,  and  because  in  that  record 
there  is  no  obscurity,  nothing  doubtful,  nothing  wanted,  nor  too 
little  answered,  but  everything  is  plain  and  sufficiently  examined 
and  according  to  the  record,  the  Judgment  is  just,  and  there  was 
no  room  for  certification,  therefore  let  the  judgment  remain  and 
hold,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim.  But  because 
nothing  was  done  before  him,  Henry,  concerning  a  certain 
hundred  [court]  which  it  was  said  appertained  to  the  said  land, 
and  that  Richard  was  said  to  have  given  it  to  Robert,  the  Jurors 
arc  questioned  whether,  upon  their  oath,  [they  say]  that  it  should 
appertain  to  the  tenement  or  not,  and  they  say  that  it  belongs 
to  that  tenement,  because  they  have  never  seen  it  separated 
therefrom,  nor  that  he  who  had  the  tenement  had  not  the 
hundred  [court].  Asked  how  Robert  was  seised  and  [how] 
his  seisin  was  used,  they  say  that  he  was  seised  of  the  hundred 

'  "A  process  known  as  a  teililication  is  employed  when  jurora  have  given  an 
otxeure  m  an  incumpletc  verJicl.  They  aiu  summoDcd  lo  Weslminslct  "  to  ccrtlry 
lo  Ihe  jusiices"  a^  tii  ihe  uaih  that  ihey  have  made.  In  ihb  nay  a  veidi'ci  mvcn 
belbie  tbe  juslices  of  assoK  is  sometimes  brought  before  (he  central  coutl.  IT  the 
jnion  admit  Ihil  ihcy  have  blundered  they  may  be  punished,  bat  recourse  in  an 
attaint  u  nee«wuy  if  iliey  ate  lo  be  charged  wilh  pojufy.  ("  Hi»I.  ul  ICngl.  Law," 
Vol.  ii.,  p.  66i.) 

•Thcnara^5r1fIhej.^^ 


432  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

[court],  for  he  held  it  at  one  time  and  took  the  profits,  but  they  do 
not  know  whether  to  the  use  of  Richard  or  of  himself 

Here  the  entry  ends  on  memb.  4,  there  being  no  space  left ;  but  on  the  back  of 
memb.  3^  there  is  an  entry  which  repeats  much  of  the  foregoing,  and  aknost  in 
identical  words,  and  concludes  as  follows  : — 

but  they  do  not  know  whether  to  his  use  or  to  the  use  of 
Richard,  because  they  do  not  know  what  he  did  therein,  but 
they  believe  for  his  own  use  rather  than  for  Richard's.  There- 
fore  

The  entry  on  memb.  yi  ends  thus.  On  memb.  3,  however,  we  find  another 
entry  relating  to  the  matter,  which  seems  to  conclude  it.     The  entry  is  as  follows : — 

Memb.  3. 

Concerning  the  hundred  [court]  of  Dulverton  which  the 
same  Robert  said  he  had  of  the  gift  of  him,  Richard,  and 
whereof  he  said  he  was  in  seisin  in  Richard's  lifetime,  and  which 
the  same  Roger  said  was  appurtenant  to  the  said  carucate  and 
that  Richard  died  seised  thereof  ...  [as  well  as  ?]  of  the 
said  carucate,  the  jurors,  questioned  as  to  what  seisin  Robert 
had  in  the  lifetime  of  Richard,  said  that  Robert  at  one  time 
held  that  hundred  [court] ;  and  questioned  who  took  the  profits 
and  receipts  of  the  hundred  [court],  they  say  Richard,  because 
he  said  that  he  would  not  allow  Robert  to  take  anything  while 
he  [Richard]  lived,  not  even  to  the  value  of  \d.  Afterwards,  on 
the  application  of  Robert,  it  came  to  certification  on  the  quindene 
of  Easter,  and  the  jurors,  asked  if  the  hundred  [court]  belonged 
to  the  said  carucate  of  land,  say  yes,  because  they  never  saw  it 
to  be  separate  from  the  land,  for  that  he  who  had  the  land  had 
the  hundred  [court].  Asked  if  Robert  had  seisin  during  the 
lifetime  of  Richard,  and  how  it  was  regarded,  and  who  took 
the  profits  thereof,  and  asked  whether  to  the  use  of  whom, 
or  to  his  own  use,  or  to  the  use  of  Richard,  they  say  that  he 
took  the  profits,  but  that  they  do  not  know  what  he  did  there- 
with, but  they  believe  rather  to  his  own  use  than  to  the  use  of 
Richard.  Therefore  it  was  considered  on  the  said  certification 
that  he  [Robert]  should  recover  his  seisin  of  the  said  hundred 
[court]." 

^  This  is  a  small  strip  of  parchment  sewn  to  the  edge  of  memb.  4. 

'  This  case  is  referred  to  in  Bracton's  Treatise  (lo.  49b.)  with  disapproval  At 
this  place  Bracton  is  discussing  the  right  of  a  donor  in  possession  of  one  part  while 
his  donee  has  obtained  possession  of  the  other.  Bracton  s  view  was  that  the  donor's 
possession  of  one  part  had  the  effect  of  ousting  the  donee.     Prof.  Maitland  says 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  433 


Memb.  4 — continued. 

1492.  Juliana,  formerly  the  wife  of  William  Wytang,  puts  in 
her  place  Richard  de  Chanton  or  Elias  le  host  against  Bar- 
tholomew de  Emclcburgh  and  Isabella  his  wife  and  others  in 
the  original  wiit  named,  on  a  plea  of  dower. 


Memb,  4^. 

Assizes  taken  at  Exebridge  {apud  Pontein  de  Exe)  on  Saturday 
next  before  the  festival  of  the  nativity  of  the  Blessed 
Virgin,^  before  Henry  de  Bracton  and  his  companions, 
namely  Ralph  de  Exe  and  others,  in  the  thirty-eighth  year 
of  the  reign  of  King  Henry. 

1493.  The  assize  comes  [to  recognise]  whether  Osbert  de 
Nordoner  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Adam  son  of  Nicholas  and 
Alice  his  wife  of  their  free  tenement  in  Chw,  since  the  first,  etc., 
and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  disseised  them  of  one 
ferling  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same,  etc. ;  that  he 
had  that  ferling  by  the  gift  of  Thomas,  father  of  his  wife,  and 
was  in  seisin  by  that  gift  for  thirty  years  until  Osbert  unjustly 
and  without  judgment  disseised  him  thereof  Osbert  comes, 
and  fully  concedes  the  said  feoffment  by  the  father  of  Alice ; 
but  he  says  the  truth  is  that  Alice  gave  that  land  to  one  Andrew 
his  brother,  who  held  it  for  two  years,  and  died  seised  thereof, 
and  Osbert,  after  his  brother's  death,  took  possession  of  the  land 
as  his  inheritance  ;  and  that  he  [Osbert]  never  made  any  dis- 
seisin thereof  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  come, 
and  say  upon  their  oath  that  after  the  gift  and  feoffment  of  the 
aforesaid  Thomas,  the  said  Alice  his  daughter  never  went  out 
of  that  land,  but  remained  there,  and  the  said  Andrew  likewise 
with  her ;  and  when  Andrew  was  thought  to  die,  she  caused  his 

(Introduclion  to  Bract  on 's  Note  Book,  p.  4c)  that  Bracton  so  decided  in  this  very 
case,  holding  that  Roger  was  entitled  to  recover  the  hundred  as  well  as  the  manor. 
The  entry  on  memb.  3  setms  to  support  this  view,  but  on  memb.  4  we  have  it  stated 
**  Set  quia  nichil  actum  fuit  coram  ipso  H.  de  quod  Hutidredo  quod  pertinere  delmit  ad 
predictam  terram^^'*  etc.  However  this  may  be,  Bracton 's  book  speaks  of  the  decision 
as  to  the  hundred  on  the  further  hearing  as  **  male  actum  est  in  contrarium  "  to  the 
principle  he  lays  down  in  the  treatise.  Bracton  gives  Robert's  name  as  **  Shute.*  I 
nave  atlhered  to  the  spelling  in  ihe  record. 

*  That  is,  on  Saturday  before  the  8th  Sept.,  1254.     In  the  margin  is  "  Dtvoti  »fJ 
ponte  dt  ExV* 

3  K 


434  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 

body  to  be  carried  from  that  house  to  another,  and  that  she  was 
always  in  seisin  until  Osbcrt  disseised  her  thereof.  Therefore  it 
is  considered  that  Alice  should  recover  her  seisin  and  damages, 
and  Osbcrt  is  in  mercy.  If  the  crop  should  be  untouched 
{integrum),  damages,  ^  mark  ;  if  not,  damages,  I  mark. 

1494.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  James  Husc, 
father  of  Hubert  Huse,  was  seised,  etc.  of  two  parts  of  two  hides 
of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  Hauton'  on  the  day  when, 
etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land  Henry  Huse  holds,  who 
comes  and  says  that  he  does  not  hold  the  land,  but  one  Adam 
Mokesham  holds  it,  and  held  it  before  the  writ  was  sought,  and 
thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  Hubert  comes,  and 
.says  that  in  truth  Adam  holds  the  land  as  Henry's  bailiff,  to  wit 
that  Adam  should  answer  to  Henry  for  all  issues  and  profits  ol 
the  land,  and  that  he  [Adam]  does  not  otherwise  hold  it  he  puts 
himself  upon  the  assize.  Henry  comes,  and  fully  concedes  that 
James  Huse,  Hubert  s  father,  was  seised,  etc.,  and  that  he  died, 
etc.,  since  the  time,  and  that  he  claims  nothing  in  the  land 
except  in  custody  and  marriage  of  Hubert,  who  is  under  age, 
as  he  says  ;  and  moreover  he  says  that  when  he  offered  him 
[Hubert]  the  sister  of  his  [Henry's]  wife,  that  he  should  marry 
her  and  take  her  to  wife,  Hubert  refused  her,  etc.  Afterwards 
Hubert  came  and  made  fine  with  his  lord  for  12  marks  for  his 
marriage,  and  his  lord  took  his  homage,  wherefore  Hubert  shall 
pay  at  the  festival  of  St.  Michael  next  following  40J.,  at  the 
nativity  of  our  Lord  40^.,  at  Easter  40^.,  and  at  the  festival  of 
St.  John  the  Baptist  40J.  Unless  he  does  this,  he  grants  that 
the  sheriff  may  raise  the  money  from  his  lands  and  chattels,  etc. 
And  Henry  is  in  mercy  for  his  unjust  detention. 

1495.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  John  Abbot  of 
Muchelnye  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  Ralph  de 
Horsy  of  his  free  tenement  in  Muchelnye,  since  the  first,  etc,  and 
whereon  it  is  complained  that  [the  Abbot]  disseised  him  of  seven 
acres  of  land  in  one  place,  and  of  three  acres  and  a  half  of 
meadow  in  another,  and  of  one  piece  {pecid)  of  land  containing 
half  an  acre,  and  whereof  he  says  that  he  was  in  peaceful  seisin 
by  the  gift  and  feoffment  of  William  his  eldest  brother,  until 
John  and  the  others  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised 
him.  The  Abbot  comes  and  says  that  he  never  disseised 
[Ralph]  of  any  land  of  which  he  was  enfeoffed  by  William  his 
eldest  brother,  and  that  this  is  true  he  puts  himself  upon  the 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  435 

assize.  The  jurors  come  and  say  upon  their  oath  that  the  Abbot 
did  not  disseise  him  of  any  tenement.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  the  Abbot  may  go  quit,  and  Ralph  is  in  mercy  for  his  false 
claim. 

1496.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Stephen  de 
Aston,  John  and  Oliver  his  brothers,  Richard  Drenger,  Nicholas 
Gangy,  Robert  atte  Hcgge,  and  Adam  Akerman  unjustly 
disseised  John  Sprotof  his  free  tenement  in  Rachel,  and  whereon 
it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  fourteen  acres  of 
land,  two  acres  and  a  half  of  meadow,  with  the  appurtenances, 
one  messuage,  and  one  curtilage  in  the  same  [vill],  and  whereon 
he  says  that  he,  Stephen,  and  the  others  carried  off  the  produce 
of  crop  and  meadow  unjustly  and  without  judgment  and  against 
his  will.  Stephen  and  the  others,  except  Richard  Greyn  {s/c) 
come  and  say  that  they  claim  nothing  in  that  tenement,  nor  have 
they  made  any  disseisin  thereof ;  but  the  aforesaid  Richard  says 
that  in  truth  the  tenement  is  the  villeinage  of  the  said  John 
Sprot ;  nevertheless  it  is  true,  he  says,  that  he  discussed  with 
John  whether  he  [John]  should  grant  to  him  and  his  wife  the  said 
tenement  to  hold  freely  for  the  whole  term  of  his  life  for  4  marks 
of  silver  which  the  said  Richard  and  his  wife  should  give  him  by 
[their]  hands,  and  that  this  is  true  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize.  The  jurors  come  and  say  upon  their  oath  that  John 
Drench  held  that  tenement  freely  of  the  aforesaid  John,  paying 
therefor  yearly  6s.,  and  doing  yearly  seven  services.  After  the 
death  of  which  John,  the  said  Richard  came  and  married  John's 
widow,  and  therefore  it  was  discussed  with  the  aforesaid  John 
Sprot  that  he  should  grant  to  him  [Richard]  that  tenement  for 
the  whole  of  his  life  by  the  same  service  as  the  said  John  did  for 
the  same,  and  for  4  marks  of  silver  which  he  gave  him  by  his 
hands,  and  wherefore  they  say  that  Richard  did  not  disseise  John 
of  the  said  tenement.  It  is  considered,  therefore,  that  Richa< 
should  be  quit,  and  that  John  should  take  nothing  by  the  ass 
but  should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim. 

At  the  foot  of  this  membrane  is  a  title  legible  only  in  part,  which,  so  fiu  as  c 
read,  appears  to  be  as  follows  : — 

Forinscc  assizes     ....     thirty-eighth,  thirty-nil 
fortieth  years  of  King  Henry     .     .     .     ,  taken  before  1 
Brae  ton     .     .     . 


AlO  V>WE5J?ETSHIjc£   PLI1»^. 


ilemb.  5. 

A-/:>:7,^'i  Vxken  at  Schfpt'^n'  on  Wednesday  next  ifber  tbe  fcsCTal 
of  St.  BarthoIomc'A  -  the  Apostle,  before  Htrjr*-  ie  Brsactra 
and  his  companions,  to  wit,  Robert  ce  Gt:r=icy.  Adir::  cc 

Aston,  ar.d  others,  in  the  thirty-ei^th  \-car  o{  the  re£^  cf 
King  Hcniy. 

1497.  The  assize  comes  to  recogntsc  whether  WTIsani 
Kverard,  Walter  Servians,  John  Tregoz,  William  Teri  Tbooas 
Dercer,  John  Golde,  Richard  son  of  Immc,*  Thomas  Cote, 
1  homas  Martin,  Jordan  the  shepherd  ^.V  Barker \^  axxi  Wuiiam 
Sym'  unjustly,  etc.  dir^scised  Richard  son  of  Stephen  of  Broen  of 
his  free  tenement  in  Kroen,  since  the  first,  etc.  and  whereon  it  is 
complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  one  virgate  of  land,  with 
the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill,  which  he  had  b\*  the  gift  of 
Stephen  his  father  by  charter,  and  of  which  he  was  in  seisin  by  that 
^ift  and  fc-offment  for  three  quarters  of  a  year  until  William  and 
the  others  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  him,  and 
thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  William  and  the  others 
come,  and  say  that  whatever  Richard  says  concerning  the  feoff- 
ment of  Stephen  his  father,  and  the  gift  and  homage  taken,  the 
same  Stephen,  after  that  gift,  always  remained  in  sei>in  and 
never  changed  his  state,  but  died  seised  thereof  without  any 
sdsin  of  Richard  therein.  And  this  appears  fully,  because  he 
demised  part  of  the  tenement  by  way  of  champart,*  and  by  his 
last  will  (in  ultima  voluntaie  sua)  he  bequeathed  the  growing 
crops  which  were  then  upon  the  tenement,  and  so  died  seised 
thereof,  and  they  [the  defendants]  in  the  name  of  the  lord  of  the 
fee  took  the  tenement  into  the  hand  of  their  lord  as  an  escheat 
until  their  lord  should  take  his  will  thereof,  and  therefore  it 
s:cms  to  them  that  if  they  are  held  to  answer  they  say  that 
without  their  lord,  in  whose  name  they  did  this,  they  ought  not 
to  answer* ;  and  that  he  [Stephen]  died  seised  thereof  they  put 
themselves  upon  the  assize. 

The  said  Richard  son  of  Stephen  says  that  whatever  William 
Kverard  and  the  others  say,  Stephen  his  father  did  not  die  seised 

'  Si.  HarthoK)mew's  D.iy,  24  Aug.  1254.     See  on  Memb.  6. 

'''  I  give  the  name  as  it  aj)j)ear>»  to  be  vvriiten.     Perhaps  he  was  son  of  Emma. 

^  *'  Ad campi  fxirum."'  This  mea*  s  that  the  lessee  had  to  pay  the  lessor  part  of 
the  crop.     See  Ducange,  "  Cimpipar.^^ 

■*  'I  his  would  appear  to  be  the  effect  of  a  passage  which  has  undergone  some 
alteration. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  437 


thereof,  as  before  he  gave  that  land  to  him  [Richard],  for  after 
the  gift  he  straightway  went  out  and  took  with  him  his  house- 
hold, to  wit,  a  certain  daughter  whom  he  had,  and  was  out  of 
seisin  for  fifteen  days;  and  afterwards,  by  a  certain  agreement 
which  he  made  with  Richard  his  son,  that  he  [Richard]  should 
find  him  in  victual  and  clothing  during  his  life,  he  came  back 
into  Richard's  house,  and  Richard  found  him  in  necessaries  while 
he  lived.  And  Stephen  did  not  afterwards  in  any  way  inter- 
meddle ;  but  he,  Richard,  always  in  everything  bore  himself  as 
lord.  If  any  land  was  given  to  the  part  of  the  field,  or  anything 
else  done  which  should  be  ihe  act  of  the  lord,  Richard  did  it, 
and  not  Stephen.  As  to  what  they  say  about  Richard  having 
bequeathed  crops  by  his  last  wall,  Richard  says  that  [Stephen] 
did  not  do  this  otherwise  than  on  his  request  and  by  Richard's 
special  grace  that  Stephen  thereby  might  provide  for  his  poor 
relations  by  his  will.  Thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 
And  because  William  says  that  he  and  the  others  did  this  in  the 
name  of  their  lord,  and  their  lord  is  in  parts  beyond  the  seas  so 
that  it  is  not  possible  to  approach  him  that  he  may  state  whether 
he  would  wish  to  avow  their  act  or  not,  nor  can  he  first  be  a 
party  to  the  judgment  before  he  has  avowed  their  deed  as  just 
or  unjust,  nor  ought  anything  to  be  acquired  for  him  unjustly 

by  them,  {ff  p'ns^s  esse  pot  it  in  iudicb  an  q^  fcin  suo^  adnocmP.it 
i  tu  td  ini^tu  n'  d  ei  aiiq'd  adq'ri  li^te  p  suos)  it  is  considered 
that  the  assize  should  proceed  in  such  manner  that  if  the 
jury  should  decide  {si  jura ta  faciat)  for  William  Everard  and 
the  others,  their  lord,  by  their  act,  should  remain  in  seisin  ;  but 
if  when  he  should  avow  their  deed  and  they  by  the  jury  should 
lose  the  seisin,  then  as  he  first  begins  to  be  a  party  by  this 
that  he  has  avowed  their  deed,  he  shall  have  conviction  (liabeat 
conviccionem)  if  he  pleases,  and  by  this  he  shall  gain  or  lose  as 
the  twelve  jurors  shall  decide. 

The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  Stephen  enfeoffed 
Richard  his  son  of  the  said  land  by  his  charter,  and  put  him  in 
seisin,  and  went  out  of  the  tenement,  and  took  with  him  such 
family  as  he  had,  to  wit,  his  daughter,  and  left  no  one  in  seisin  in 
his  name,  and  Richard  his  son  remained  in  seisin,  and  in  all 
things  acted  as  lord.  Afterwards  Stephen  stayed  out  of  that 
tenement  for  nearly  fifteen  days,  and  then  returned  to  his  son 
that  he  [the  son]  of  his  grace  should  find  [Stephen]  in  food  and 
clothing  during  his  life,  and  thus  he  was  harboured,  being  old 


438  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


and  impotent  and  not  able  to  see.  And  the  jurors,  asked  in 
what  way  Richard  treated  the  seisin,  [whether]  for  himself  as 
lord,  without  his  father,  or  for  the  father  as  lord  without  the  son, 
or  for  both  to^^jcther  in  common  (so  that  they  should  till  the  land 
and  spend  the  fruits,  the  father  as  to  one  part,  and  the  son  as  to 
the  other,  struck  out),  say  upon  their  oath  that  Stephen  never 
intermeddled  or  had  any  mastery  or  order,  but  that  Richard  by 
and  in  all  things  bore  himself  as  lord.  Questioned  if  Stephen 
set  over  any  part  of  the  land  to  the  part  of  the  field,  they  say 
no.  Asked  if  Stephen  bequeathed  the  crops  of  the  tenement  by 
his  last  will  as  lord,  they  say  no,  unless  by  the  special  grace  of 
Richard*  his  son,  so  that  he  might  provide  for  his  poor  relatives. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Richard  should  recover  his  seisin, 
and  William  Everard  and  the  others  are  in  mercy,  saving  never- 
theless to  their  lord  to  recover  when  he  shall  return  if  he  should 
desire  to  sue. 

1498.  Robert  de  Punchardun,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  against  Reginald  de  Moun  and  others  in  the  writ 
[named],  concerning  a  tenement  in  Cudecum,*  does  not  prose- 
cute. Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  John 
le  Tryl  and  Nicholas  the  Serjeant  {ie  seriant)  of  the  county  of 
Devon,  are  in  mercy.  It  is  testified  that  they  had  summons  to 
prosecute  the  writ  after  attachment^  {et  testatu  est  qd  ttuett  sum 
de  pi  bre  suu  f^t  attachiamtfi). 

1499.  Herbert  the  fisherman,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel 
disseisin  concerning  common  of  pasture  in  Aucleye  against 
Philip  son  of  Geoffry  and  others  in  the  writ  [named],  came  and 
withdrew  from  his  writ.  Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prose- 
cute, namely  John  the  carter  and  William  the  fisherman,  are  in 
mercy. 

1 500.  Robert  Bozun,  who  brought  an  assize  of  novel  disseisin 
against  Stephen  le  Teinturer  and  others  in  the  writ  [named], 
concerning  a  tenement  in  Brugewater,  came  and  withdrew. 
Therefore  he  and  his  pledges  to  prosecute,  namely  Ralph  de 
Treberge  and  Thomas  de  Hoo,  are  in  mercy. 

Manh.  ^d. 

1 501.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  the  Prior  de 
Montearuto,  Stephen  the  serjeant,  and  Robert  Dulling  unjustly 

*  The  roll  has  **  Stephen"  here,  an  obvious  ini.>take. 

-  CutcomI>e.  *  In  ihc  maigin  is  a  note  **  damages,  J  mark." 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  439 


etc.  disseised  Richard  de  Boloyne,  Andrew  de  Esse,  William 
Giffard,  John  Crude,  and  Adam  Pain  of  their  common  of  pasture 
in  Tintenhull,  Wynchecumbe,  and  Esse,  which  is  appurtenant  to 
their  free  tenements,  and  whereon  Richard  complains  that  the 
Prior  and  the  others  disseised  him  of  common  for  all  his  beasts ; 
and  Andrew,  William,  John,and  Adam  complain  that  the  Prior  and 
the  others  disseised  them  of  their  common  of  pasture  for  all  their 
beasts  except  sheep.  Afterwards  Andrew,  William,  John,  and 
Adam  come  and  say  that  they  do  not  complain  in  respect  of 
any  common  of  pasture  in  the  said  two  vills,  to  wit,  in  Wynche- 
cumbe and  Esse,  but  in  Tintenhulle.  Therefore  let  the  Prior 
answer  as  to  the  common  in  Tintenhull.  The  Prior  comes,  and 
says  that  neither  he,  Richard,  nor  his  ancestors  had  any  common 
there  except  at  the  will  of  the  Prior,  and  for  a  fine  which  they 
made  with  him,  more  or  less  as  he  willed.  Thereon  he  puts 
himself  upon  the  assize.  Andrew  and  the  others  come,  and  say 
that  they  were  always  wont  to  have  common  there  and  the  Prior 
with  them,  and  not  for  any  fine  to  be  made  for  the  common 
more  or  less,  at  the  will  of  the  Prior  ;  but  they  say  that  the  fine 
was  for  a  right  of  way  and  not  for  common,  and  thereon  they 
put  themselves  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  come  and  say  that 
the  said  vills  of  Wynchecumbe  and  Esse  were  never  accustomed 
to  have  common  with  the  said  vill  of  Tintenhull,  except  at  the 
will  of  the  Prior,  and  for  a  fine  which  they  might  make  with 
him,  more  or  less,  at  his  will.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that 
the  Prior  be  quit,  and  that  Andrew  and  others  should  take 
nothing  by  that  assize,  but  should  be  in  mercy  for  their  false 
claim. 

1502.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Ansell  de 
Gomay,  Thomas  le  Waleys,  and  Thomas  le  Chanu  unjustly,  etc. 
disseised  Roger  de  Beanton,  David  de  Welinton,  and  John  le 
Moine  of  their  common  of  pasture  in  Ferenton*  which  appertains 
to  their  free  tenements  in  Peanton,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and 
whereon  they  complain  and  say  that  they  and  their  ancestors 
were  always  accustomed  to  have  common  for  all  their  beasts  in 
Ferenton  during  opcntime,  except  in  a  certain  close  called  la 
Haie,  where  they  claim  no  common,  and  for  this  reason :  that  the 
said  Ansell  and  his  ancestors  were  alwt-'ys  wont  to  common  on 
their  [the  plaintiffs]  lands  in  Peanton*,  and  they  put  themselves 
on  the  assize.  Ansell  and  the  others  come  and  say  that  [the 
plaintiffs]  ought  not  to  have  common  on  his  lands  in  Ferenton, 


4^0  SOMFRSETSIIIRE   PLEAS. 


and  that  they  never  have  had  connmon  except  upon  fine  made 
with  him,  g^iving  sometimes  more,  sometimes  less,  at  his  will,- 
and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  come 
and  say  that  the  said  Roger  and  his  ancestors  and  the  others 
aforesaid  always  had  common  in  Ferenton'  as  is  aforesaid,  and 
not  at  the  will  of  Ansell,  giving  more  or  less,  but  that  every 
of  them  always  had  common  with  the  other.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Roger  and  the  others  should  recover  their  seisin, 
and  Ansell  and  the  others  are  in  mercy.^ 

1 503.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  *  was 

seised  in  his  deoaesne,  etc.,  of  one  knight's  fee,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  Asse  on  the  day,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc.,  which  land 
Walter  de  Faucunberge  holds,  who  comes  and  confesses  that  the 
aforesaid  died  seised  thereof,  and  that  the  aforesaid 

is  his  next  heir,  but  he  says  that  the  said 
is  not  of  full  age,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize. 
The  aforesaid  says  that  he  is  of  full  age,  and  thereon 

he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  that  he  is  of 
full  age,  to  wit  twenty  and  one  years.  Upon  this  comes  the  said 
Walter  by  his  attorney,  and  says  that  the  said  with- 

drew himself  from  his  [Walters]  custody  and  married  without 
leave  of  Walter  to  whom  the  marriage  belonged,  and  he  seeks 
judgment  whether  he  [Walter]  ought  to  have  seisin  of  the  said 
tenement  until  he  should  satisfy  to  himself  the  value  of  the 
marriage,  which  he  estimates  at  100/.  And  the  said 
could  not  contradict  this,  and  forthwith  satisfied  to  Walter  the 
value  of  the  marriage  [payable]  at  times  fixed  between  them,  and 
recovered  his  seisin  of  the  said  land. 

Memb,  6. 

Assizes  taken  at  Marleberg'  on  the  day  of  St.  Barnabas  the 
apostle,^  before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his  companions,  to  wit, 
Alexander  dc  Chevercl  and  John  de  Kelling  in  the  thirty- 
eighth  year  of  the  reign  of  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

(Assizes  taken  at   Schepton)  on  Wednesday  next  after  the 

^  In  the  margin,  damages  \  mark,  "c.c."  which  may  mean  clericus  cepit^  or,  it 
may  be,  as  I  think,  *'  c.t,"  clerici  totius^  meaning  that  the  amount  was  paid  to  the 
clerk  for  the  party.  In  a  later  roll,  No.  1204,  occurs  ^*dampna  Iw.  clericis'*  memb.  2. 
In  roll  No.  i2cg,  we  find  ""^  dam  pita  2.s.  c.  tih'.'\  memb.  lOJ'. 

-  The  blanks  in  this  entry  arc  so  left  in  the  oilgiual. 

3  The  irth  June,   1254. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS.  441 


festival  of  St.  Bartholomew  the  apostle,^  before  H.  de  Bracton 
(and  his  companions,  to  wit,  Robert)  de  Gornay,  Adam  de 
Aston,  in  the  thirty-eighth  year  of  the  reign  of  the  King. 

Memb.  7. 

1504.  Walter  de  Faucunberge,  who  brought  an  assize  of 
novel  disseisin  against  the  Prior  de  Monte  Acuto  and  others  in 
the  writ  [named],  concerning  his  common  of  pasture  in  Tyten- 
hull,  Wynchccumbe,  and  Esse,  does  not  proceed.  Therefore  he 
and  his  pledges  are  in  mercy,  namely  Gerard  de  Esse  and 
Walter  Scherpe. 

1505.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Christina 
daughter  of  John,  the  mother  of  Anastasia,  daughter  of  Simon, 
was  seised,  etc.  of  one  messuage  and  ten  acres  of  land,  with  the 
appurtenances,  in  Boclande,  on  the  day,  etc.,  and  whether,  etc., 
which  land  and  which  messuage  Richard  Beaufiz  holds.  After- 
wards they  are  agreed  by  licence,  and  the  agreement  is  such  that 
the  said  Anastasia  gives  up  all  right  and  claim,  and  the  said 
Richard  Beaufiz  gives  her  \  mark,  which  he  is  to  pay  her  at  the 
festival  of  St.  Michael  next. 

1 506.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Godfrey  de 
Auno,  John  le  Messer,  Philip  le  Messer,  Robert  Batte,  Robert 
Gele,  Robert  Tutling,  William  Wylecok,  William  Gravclin', 
Hamo  Stok,  Edith  formerly  the  wife  of  Gilbert  Young  {juveves), 
Roger  son  of  Gilbert,  and  Robert  Le  Hyne  unjustly,  etc.  dis- 
.seised  Gilbert  son  of  Geoffry  of  his  free  tenement  in  Cumton 
Daunon,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  he  complains  that  they 
disseised  him  of  one  acre  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  etc., 
and  Godfrey  Dauno  and  the  others  come  and  say  nothing 
against  the  assize  [or]  why  the  assize  should  remain.  The 
jurors  come  and  say  that  the  said  Godfrey  and  the  others  in  the 
writ  [named]  did  disseise  him  as  the  writ  says.  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Gilbert,  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  Godfrey  and 
the  others  are  in  mercy.' 

^  St.  Bartholomew's  day  was  the  24th  August  1254.  This  title  appears  at  the 
oot  of  memb.  6,  where  it  is  sewn  to  the  top  of  memb.  7.  It  formerly  applied  to 
something  written  below  it,  cut  off,  all  but  one  line,  before  the  stitchinij  was  done. 
The  parts  within  brackets  are  struck  out,  and  possibly  it  may  have  been  intended  that 
the  whole  should  be  similarly  treated  ;  if  not,  it  would  seem  that  the  iwrtially-erased 
tiUe  was  meant  to  apply  to  the  entries  on  memb.  7.  See  title  to  mi  mb.  5. 
'  In  tlic  margin — Damages,  ^r. 

3  L 


442  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


Memb.  6d, 

1 507.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Avice,  formerly 
the  wife  of  Robert  de  Berton*,  and  Robert  his  brother  unjustly, 
etc.  disseised  Adam  de  la  Hale  and  Wymarca  his  wife  of  their 
free  tenement  in  La  Leythe,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon 
they  complain  that  [the  defendants]  disseised  them  of  one 
ferling  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances.  Avice  comes,  and  says 
that  she  did  not  disseise  them  unjustly,  because  the  said  Adam 
of  his  free  will  gave  up  the  land  to  her,  and  thereon  she  puts 
herself  upon  the  assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that 
one  Robert  the  Frenchman  (le  Franceis)  gave  the  said  tenement 
to  one  Robert  de  Berton  in  frank  marriage  with  the  said  Avice 
his  daughter,  and  afterwards  the  said  Adam  came  and  so  im- 
portuned {et  in  tantum  locutus  fuit  cum)  Robert  de  Berton  that 
Robert  demised  by  a  certain  chirograph,  which  Avice  proffers 
and  which  testifies  this,  the  whole  of  that  tenement  to  the  said 
Adam  and  Wymarca  his  wife  to  farm,  to  have,  to  Adam  and 
Wymarca  for  the  whole  life  of  Robert  de  Berton*,  and  when 
Robert  was  about  to  die  he  enjoined  his  executors  that  they 
should  pay  Adam  and  Wymarca  2^  marks,  and  they  did 
this.  After  the  death  of  Robert,  Adam  and  Wymarca  of  their 
free  will  gave  up  to  Avice  the  whole  of  the  said  tenement  as 
her  marriage  portion,  and  afterwards  Adam  came  and  discussed 
with  Avice  and  made  fine  with  her  for  20s.  for  that  he  might 
hold  that  tenement  for  one  year  until  he  should  better  provide  [for 
himself].  When  he  should  have  paid  her  20s,  he  offered  her 
2s.,  and  she  refused  them  ;  and  because  he  did  not  hold  to  his 
bargain  she  took  the  tenement  into  her  hand,  wherefore  the 
jurors  say  that  she  did  not  disseise  them  unjustly.  Therefore 
Avice  is  quit,  and  Adam  takes  nothing  by  that  assize,  but  is  in 
mercy  for  his  false  claim. 

1508.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  de 
Lazur  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Luke  le  Blund  of  his  free  tenement 
in  Laurton',  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that 
he  disseised  him  of  ten  acres  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in 
the  same,  etc.  Thomas  comes,  and  says  that  he  did  not  disseise 
him  of  any  tenement,  for  Luke  was  enfeoffed  by  a  certain  woman 
whom  he  afterwards  married,  whose  inheritance  that  land  was, 
so  that  they  both  were  in  seisin  of  the  tenement  and  together 
tilled  the  land,  and  that  he  [Luke]  had  no  seisin  of  himself  with- 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  443 


out  his  wife,  and  he  [Thomas]  put  himself  upon  the  assize. 
Luke  comes  and  says  that  it  is  true  that  he  was  enfeoffed  of  that 
land  by  his  wife,  and  that  after  the  feoffment  he  was  in  peaceful 
seisin  for  a  long  time  before  he  married  his  wife  until  Thomas 
disseised  him  ;  and  that  this  is  true  he  puts  himself  upon  the 
assize.  The  jurors  say  that  Luke  was  in  peaceful  seisin  for  half 
a  year  or  more,  so  that  he  tilled  the  land  with  his  own  plough, 
and  took  the  profits  without  any  cost  contributed  by  the  woman. 
Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Luke  should  recover  his  seisin, 
and  Thomas  is  in  mercy.^ 

Mernb,  7d. 

1509.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Robert  de 
Weston'  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Thomas  de  Weston  of  his 
common  of  pasture  in  Weston  appertaining  to  his  free  tenement 
in  the  same  [vill],  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that  he  disseised 
him  of  half  his  common  of  pasture  in  la  Niwelese  and  of  common 
of  pasture  in  la  Berkerie,  which  contains  about  25  acres,  and  he 
was  always  wont  to  have  common  there  just  as  in  his  own 
adjacent  pasture  for  all  manner  of  beasts  on  every  day  in  the 
year  until  the  said  Robert  disseised  him,  and  thereon  he  puts 
himself  upon  the  assize.  Robert  comes,  and  says  that  he  has 
not  disseised  [Thomas]  of  any  common  of  pasture,  because  he 
can  and  ought  not  to  have  common  there  except  at  open  time 
and  after  the  crop  is  carried  off,  and  he  puts  himself  on  the 
assize  as  to  this.  The  jurors  come  and  say  that  Robert  de  Weston 
did  disseise  the  said  Thomas  of  the  common  of  pasture  as  the 
writ  says.  Therefore  it  is  considered  that  Thomas  should  re- 
cover his  seisin,  and  Robert  is  in  mercy. 

1510.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Henry  de 
Champflur'  and  William  Brangling  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  John 
de  Hanleye  of  his  free  tenement  in  Stanc,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and 
whereon  he  complains  that  they  disseised  him  of  one  ferling  of 
land  and  3^.  of  rent,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  [vill]. 
He  says  that  a  certain  villein  of  the  Abbot  of  Glaston',  namely 
Walter  Spragel,  held  that  tenement  in  hand  and  thereof  enfeoffed 
him,  John,  so  that  by  the  gift  and  feoffment  he  was  in  seisin  for 
three  weeks  until  the  aforesaid  [defendants]  disseised  him.  And 
William  Spraling  {sic)  and  the  bailiff  of  Henry  de  Champilur' 

^  Damages,  i  mark^in  the  marg^ 


444  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


come  and  say  that  the  assize  ought  not  to  be  made,  and  that 
[John]  could  not  be  disseised  because  he  never  was  in  seisin, 
either  before  the  time  of  the  writ  or  after,  and  on  this  he 
[William]  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  As  to  the  3^.  of  rent, 
they  say  that  [John]  never  was  seised  thereof  otherwise  than 
by  an  intrusion  which  he  made  into  a  certain  house  for  one 
day,  and  took  1 2d.  (n'  p  ^ndani  infstoni  qTm  jec  1  (fdd  domo  p 
utiH  dieni  K  up  xij  den),  and  that  this  is  true  he  puts  himself  upon 
the  assize.  The  jurors  come  and  say  that  the  aforesaid  have 
not  disseised  the  said  John,  either  of  the  land  or  of  the  rent, 
because  he  never  was  seised  thereof.  Therefore  it  is  considered 
that  William  and  Henry  are  quit,  and  that  John  should  take 
nothing  by  that  assize,  and  should  be  in  mercy  for  his  false  claim. 

1 5 1 1.  John  de  Holte  comes,  and  proffers  a  charter  of  our  lord 
the  King  which  aquits  him  of  juries,  assizes,  and  recognitions  for 
the  whole  term  of  his  life. 

Memb.  8d. 

Assizes  taken  apud  Pontem  de  Wmblegh  on  Tuesday  next 
after  the  festival  of  the  Annunciation  of  the  Blessed  Mary,* 
before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his  companions,  to  wit,  William  de 
Punchardun  and  William  son  of  Warin,  and  others,  in  the  thirty- 
ninth  year  of  our  King. 

Mcfnb,  ID. 

Assizes  taken  at  Schipton'  on  the  morrow  of  the  Decollation  of 
St.  John  the  Baptist,*  before  Henry  de  Bracton  and  his  com- 
panions, to  wit,  Robert  de  Brues,  Thomas  Tryvet,  Bartholo- 
mew de  Emlebirrs  and  others,  in  the  thirty  .  .  th  year  of 
the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

1 5 1 2.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Thomas  Suein 
and  Isabella  his  wife  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  William  Sley  of  his 
free  tenement  in  Bath,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  com- 
plained that  they  disseised  him  of  a  certain  shop  {soldo)  which 
contains  thirty-two  feet  in  length  and  sixteen  feet  in  breadth,  and 

*  Tuesday  after  the  25th  March,  1255.     This  membrane  contains  assizes  of  the 
county  of  Devon. 

*  That  is,  the  30th  August.     The  year  is  not  certain     The  edge  of  the  membrane 
is  lost,  and  with  it  the  end  of  the  figure. 


SOMERSETSHIRE  FLEAS.  44$ 

whereof  he  says  he  was  in  good  seisin  by  the  gift  of  the  Prior  of 
Bath  until  they  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  him.' 

1513.  Let  the  assize  of  mort  d'anccstor  which  Elena  de 
Bacwell  and  Ahcc  her  sister  arraigned  against  Joan  Beneyt  and 
Thomas  her  son  concerning  a  tenement  in  Bacwell  remain  with- 
out a  day  because  Joan,  who  held  the  said  tenement  in  common 
with  the  said  Thomas,  has  died.  It  is  said  that  they  [the 
plaintiffs]  may  sue  him,  if  they  wish,  by  another  writ. 

1 5 14.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Master  Hubert 
son  of  Walter  unjustly,  etc,  disseised  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife 
of  Elias  de  Burton',  of  her  free  tenement  in  Baggesworse,  since 
the  first,  etc,  whereon  she  complains  that  he  disseised  her  of  one 
hide  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same  vill,  whereof 
she  says  she  was  seised  as  of  her  inheritance,  and  she  delivered 
the  land  to  one  Walter,  Hubert's  brother,  to  farm,  and  after  his 
term  she  put  herself  in  seisin  of  the  said  land  and  held  it  for 
eight  days,  well  and  in  peace,  until  Hubcrtdisseised  her  unjustly 
and  without  judgment.  Master  Hubert  does  not  come,  but  his 
bailiff  comes,  and  says  that  it  is  true  that  Matilda  delivered  the 
land  to  Walter  to  farm  as  is  aforesaid,  and  when  Matilda  wished 
to  marry  she  of  her  own  good  will  gave  the  land  to  the  said 
Master  Walter  that  he  might  marry  her,  and  Walter  gave  the 
land  to  the  said  Hubert  his  son,  who  held  it  for  eight  years 
After  the  death  of  her  husband  she  entered  upon  the  land  and 
held  it  for  eight  days,  as  is  aforesaid,  until  the  said  Hubert 
disseised  her  unjustly  and  without  judgment'  The  jurors  come 
and  say  upon  their  oath  that  Hubert  did  disseise  Matilda  as  the 
writ  says,  and  moreover  they  say  that  they  do  not  know  of  any 
feoffment  made  to  the  said  Walter  or  the  said  Hubert.  There- 
fore it  is  considered  that  Matilda  should  recover  her  seisin  and 
damages,'  and  the  said  Master  Hubert  is  in  mercy. 

Memb.  9,' 
Afterwards  Master  Hubert  came  and  said  that  Walter  was 
enfeoffed  of  the  said  land  by  Matilda,  and  he  produced  Matilda's 

'  In  themai^in— "at  thcii  next  cominf;  t«  Bath." 

*  The  words  "unjustly  and  willioul  judgment''  must  surely  be  a  clerical  trior  in 
Hubert's  plea. 

'  .\ccording  to  the  RiarginKl  note  they  were  BSScisei]  at  ll|  marki. 

'  Memb.  9  ia  a  strip  of  paichment  attached  to  the  face  o(  rnuml),  10.  [l  tunlains 
the  result  of  the  rehearing  in  the  above  case,  and  it  may  conveniently  be  inteip  >l.iteU 
hei«.    As  I  o  [he  process  »r  eectificaiion,  see  xnAe  lu  N'a  1 JS6. 


446  SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS. 


charter  of  feoffment.  He  said  also  that  Walter  enfeoffed  him  by 
his  charter,  which  he  proffers  and  which  testifies  this.  So  the 
sheriff  was  ordered  that  he  should  cause  the  jurors  to  come  to 
certify  to  the  justices  concerning  the  oath  which  they  took  upon 
certain  articles  touching  that  assize.  They  come,  and  say  that 
on  the  taking  of  that  assize  they  were  uncertain,  for  no  charter 
of  feoffment  was  produced  on  the  part  of  Master  Hubert,  and 
they  believed  that  there  was  no  feoffment  or  demise  for  a  term. 
They  pray  that  they  may  be  allowed  to  amend  their  verdict,  and 
put  themselves  upon  the  mercy  of  our  lord  the  King  for  their 
transgression,  and  make  fine  for  ;f20  for  that  transgression. 
They  say  that  Matilda,  after  she  had  demised  her  land  to  the 
said  Walter  for  a  term  of  years,  enfeoffed  Walter  by  her  charter, 
and  Walter  [enfeoffed]  the  said  Master  Hubert  as  the  same 
Master  Hubert  says  ;  that  Matilda  entered,  and  Master  Hubert 
straightway  ejected  her.  Therefore  he  did  not  disseise  her  un- 
justly, for  she  had  no  seisin  otherwise  than  by  intrusion.  There- 
fore let  Master  Hubert  have  his  seisin  again,  and  Matilda  is  in 
mercy  for  her  false  claim.  Let  her  be  delivered  to  prison  for 
deceiving  the  court.  And  because  Matilda  would  not  come  to 
hear  the  certification,  let  the  tenement  be  held  in  the  hand  of  our 
lord  the  King,  and  let  the  sheriff  have  her  body  at  Tanton'  on 
Sunday  next  after  the  Epiphany  to  hear  her  judgment 

Memb.  lO — continued, 

1 5 1 5.  Let  the  assize  of  novel  disseisin  which  John  deCratelegh' 
arraigned  against  Richard  Luvel  and  William  le  Messer  con- 
cerning his  common  of  pasture  in  Hunewyk  remain  without  a  day, 
because  the  said  Richard  has  died. 

1 5 16.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  de 
Monte  Acuto,  Walter  de  Tundreslegh',  and  Laurence  Dow  un- 
justly, etc.  disseised  Andrew  Wak'  of  his  free  tenement  in  Got- 
hull,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that 
William  and  the  others  disseised  him  of  two  carucates  of  land 
and  one  messuage,  with  the  appurtenances.  He  says  that  when 
one  William  de  Faris  formerly  would  have  enfeoffed  him  thereof, 
because  of  an  objection  which  William  de  Monte  Acuto  offered 
to  the  feoffment,  it  was  agreed  that  the  said  William  de  Paris, 
who  previously  held  that  tenement  of  the  said  William  de  Monte 
Acuto  in  chief,  should  release  to  William  de  Monte  Acuto  his 


homage,  and  that  William  de  Monte  Acuto  should  enfeoff  the 
said  Andrew,  and  William  took  Andrew's  homage  and  put  him 
in  seisin  by  his  bailiff;  so  that  after  the  taking  of  the  homage 
Andrew  was  in  seisin  for  seven  weeks,  until  the  said  William  and 
the  others  previously  named  unjustly  and  without  judgment 
disseised  him,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize, 
William  de  Monte  Acuto  comes,  and  says  that  he  did  him 
[Andrew]  no  injury  nor  unjustly  disseised  him,  because  when  he 
should  have  taken  Andrew's  homage  he  was  informed  that 
Andrew  held  a  tenement  of  our  lord  the  King  in  chief,  so  that 
the  custody  of  all  Andrew's  lands,  when  he  should  die,  if  his 
heirs  should  be  under  age,  ought  to  be  in  the  hand  of  our  lord 
the  King  wherever  he  should  hold,  and  because  he  [William] 
would  thus  lose  the  custody  of  the  said  land,  he  was  unwilling 
to  receive  Andrew's  homage  unless  Andrew  would  grant  to  him 
that  if  by  Pentecost  after  the  taking  of  the  homage  he  [William] 
should  find  out  that  he  [Andrew]  held  anything  in  any  manner 
of  our  lord  the  King,  then  straightway  he  [William]  should  put 
himself  upon  the  said  land  without  impediment  or  contradiction 
of  Andrew,  which  agreement  Andrew  admitted  and  conceded 
before  many.  And  when  he,  William,  found  out  that  he 
[Andrew]  held  certain  land  of  our  lord  the  King  in  chiet  in 
Tangele  in  the  county  of  Southampton,  he,  according  to  the 
said  agreement,  put  himself  upon  the  land,  and  thus  he  made 
no  unjust  disseisin,  and  that  he  thus  made  an  agreement  he 
puts  himself  upon  the  jury  (super  juratam)  and  upon  those  who 
were  there  when  the  homage  was  taken  as  the  court  of  our  lord 
the  King  shall  consider,  Andrew  says,  as  before,  that  William 
took  his  homage  for  the  said  land,  and  put  him  in  seisin  by  his 
bailiff  without  any  absolute  condition,  and  that  he  was  in  seisin 
for  seven  weeks  until  William  and  the  others  unjustly  disseised 
him  thereof,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize,  what- 
ever William  says  of  any  agreement.  If  any  agreement  was 
made  on  the  part  of  William,  he  [Andrew]  never  consented  to 
any,  and  he  is  not  bound  by  any  agreement.  William  says  that 
the  agreement  was  such  as  is  aforesaid,  and  by  such  agreement 
and  in  no  other  manner  he  put  himself  in  seisin.  He  offers  our 
lord  the  King  20J.  that  the  truth  may  be  inquired  into.  And 
because  William  does  not  deny  the  taking  of  Andrew's  homage 
or  his  seisin  as  Andrew  says,  but  alleges  that  he  [William]  put 
himself  in  seisin  by  the  said  agreement,  which  Andrew  in  every 


44S  SOMER>ET>HIRE   PLEAS. 


way  denies,  it  is  considered  that  the  truth  should  be  asoertaiiied 
by  the  jurors  of  the  aforesaid  assize,  and  by  those  who  m-ere 
present  when  the  homage  was  taken,  and  who  have  no  cDnccm 
in  the  matter  [fni  nullam  partem  aiiqua  a^nitaU  attingani)  in 
the  manner  of  a  jur\',  whether  William  took  Andrew's  hooiage 
without  any  condition  or  whether  b>-  agreement,  and  put  him 
in  seisin,  and  so  that  he  i^-as  in  seisin  for  seven  weeks  until 
William  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  him  as 
Andrew  says,  or  whether  Andrew,  before  William  took  his 
homage,  made  the  said  agreement  i^ith  him  by  which  he 
[William]  put  himself  in  seisin,  and  to  which  Andrew  consented, 
as  William  sa\-s.  yLcz^-^r  Jczi'm  cm  tJu  same  wumh.  is  the 
Arof'f  wrwc"  of  an  en:n  cf  thu  DuJiertc*m  cast,  7s:kL-A  is  sfntct  omL 
ZK'XtA  :Ju  ZLvras  "^*/li  .tVr/"  :k  :ju  margin:  then  the  ahne  case 
is  /.icr*  */  ttgjin. »  A  cay  is  gi\Tn  to  the  parties  before  our 
lorJ  the  King  in  three  weeks  after  Michaelmas  to  hear  the  tuill 
of  our  lord  the  King,  and  whether  he  desires  that  the  assize 
should  pivvecd  in  the  county,  and  that  judgment  should  be 
gi\xn  when  nothing:  in  the  said  record  should  be  obscure,  for 
William  pa'^fferec  a  writ  or"  cur  ioni  the  King  that  judgment 
shv^ulvi  be  put  in  respite  without  any  reason  given  after  taking 
the  assi.'c.  A  day  is  ^\-en  them  befcof  the  jusdces  at  West- 
minster in  three  weeks  after  M:ch.aelmas.* 

151  •.  Mathew  ,.:c  Chvlne  agrainst  Robert  Fachct  on  a  plea  of 
ass::c  c:  r?.^^r:  d"arrx^>t.  r,  by  KcScr:  de  Ha\'er:ng.  On  the  next 
crrr.rj:  cf  the  justiw-xs  .  .  .  [unless?'  H.  ce  Bracton  Jshall] 
rr^-.-::usIy  Vcme]  :rt.^  ]th:s^"  rorts,  etc.-     And  Robert  plots  in 


:5:x  Al-.Txvl  do  NiclvT  a^iinst  William  ce  Corf  on  a  pi 

«  m 


Afs  ris  tilxi-  it  Fxj'rr:.^   .".  Svit-r/iy  n^xt  ifrerthe  Epiphany 

:f  :«-r  L:ri.  rcvre   :-i --■  i^-  FriJtcr.  ir.-  his  cconpanions, 
t:  *:.  W   1  i"   /j  V\yj^  .:r:h    ir.i  :ih;in?^  :n  the  fortieth 

•    «.^_        .  I.       aX  .^       «    •  •■  • 

■  m  ■ 

-    «    -     «  \f   •  «•  -        -  J»      .  ^  -     — •  .-  —    -  •  ■        — »>  -  •  C         ^       ^■■'■"^     •*       t    ""J*  -X    ■*  i  ""^       rf-^Jk 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  449 

or  William  de  Beleston*  against  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of 
Walter  de  Ely,  on  a  plea  of  dower. 

1520.  Amabel,  formerly  the  wife  of  Henry  de  Champflurs, 
puts  in  her  place  Martin  the  Scott  {le  Scot)  or  Richard  al 
Curtnes  against  Hilaria  de  Champflurs  and  others  in  the  writ 
[named]  on  a  plea  of  dower. 

Memb.  iid. 

Assizes  taken  before  H.  de  Bractone  and  his  companions, 
justices  assigned  in  divers  counties,  in  the  thirty-eighth,  fortieth, 
and  forty-first  years  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King 
John.  Also  essoins  and  amercements  before  the  council  of  our 
lord  the  King  for  the  thirty-eighth  year.^ 

• 

Memb.  12. 

Assizes  taken  at  BristolP  on  the  morrow  of  the  Decollation  of 
St  John  the  Baptist,  before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his  companions, 
to  wit,  the  Abbot  of  St  Augustine  of  Bristoll',  Alexander  de 
Monte  Forti,  and  others,  in  the  thirty-eighth  vear  of  the  reign  of 
King  Henry.* 

Memb  13. 

Assizes  taken  at  Toriton*  on  Monday  next  after  the  festival  ol 
St  Egidius  the  Abbot,*  before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his 
companions,  to  wit,  William  de  Punchardun  and  others,  in 
the  fortieth  year  of  King  Henry. 

1521.  Inquest  held  before  H.  de  Bracton  at  Aswik' in  the 
county  of  Somerset,  on  Monday  next  after  the  festival  of 
St.  Michael,  in  the  fortieth  and  beginning  of  the  forty-first  years 
of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Henry  de  Bracton  was  ordered  that,  by  the  oath  of  trust- 
worthy and  lawful  men,  as  well  knights  as  others,  by  whom  the 
truth  of  the  matter  might  be  the  better  made  known,  he  should 
diligently  inquire  by  what  metes  and  bounds  the  House  of 
Wytteham*  of  the  Carthusian  Order  was  founded  by  the  gift  of 

^  Memb.  1 1  is  a  little  strip  of  parchment  sewn  to  the  end  of  memb.  10.  There 
is  nothing  on  its  face.     It  is  the  label  to  the  roll. 

"  Memb.  12  and  its  dorso  relate  to  Gloucester  and  Devon. 

^  St.  Eddius's  da^,  the  1st  September.  This  title  comes  lower  down  on  the 
roll,  after  the  proceedings  on  the  inquest  with  the  marginal  note  *'  Devon." 

*  Witham. 

3  M 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  45 1 


bounds,  and  many  others,  came  within  the  time  and  received 
a  competent  exchange  for  their  lands  which  they  had  there, 
so  that  the  Prior  and  brethren,  according  to  the  requirement 
of  their  Order,  might  possess  that  place  in  peace  and  tranquillity, 
and  so  that  no  one  should  interfere  with  them.  They  say  that 
no  one  could  claim  any  right  within  the  aforesaid  meles  and 
bounds,  either  in  tenement  or  of  common,  but  that  the  Prior  and 
brothers  might  enclose  the  place  within  the  said  metes  by  ditch 
and  hedge  without  doing  injury  to  anyone,  if  this  should  please 
our  lord  the  King.  Touching  what  is  said  as  to  how  and  by 
whom  and  at  what  time  the  Abbess  of  Scheftebyr  and  the  others 
having  common  within  the  said  metes  had  that  common,  they 
say  upon  their  oath  that  no  one  could  have  common  ther 
either  of  herbage  or  mast  {pessone\  except  through  the  Prior 
and  brothers  and  of  their  grace,  and  for  a  fine  which  they  should 
make  with  them,  sometimes  more,  sometimes  less,  at  the  will 
of  the  Prior  and  brethren*  Neither  the  Abbess  nor  her  men 
of  Culmeton'  nor  anyone  who  had  land  in  other  neighbouring 
vills,  to  wit,  in  Bradelcgh',  Emefeud,  and  in  Norton,  could  claim 
any  common  within  the  said  boundaries,  except  by  the  grace 
and  will  of  the  Prior  and  fraternity,  and  in  the  manner  aforesaid. 
There  are  many  on  the  said  inquest  who  have  seen,  as  they  say, 
that  when  the  Prior  and  brothers  caused  certain  pigs  of  the 
Abbess,  found  in  his  woods  at  the  mast  time,  to  be  impounded, 
the  Abbess  could  not  have  them  quit  until  she  made  fine  with 
the  Prior  and  brethren.  Thus  one  Master  Robert  de  la  Forde, 
then  steward  of  the  Abbess,  made  fine  in  the  name  of  the  Abbess 
with  the  Prior  and  brothers  before  he  could  have  his  pigs  quit, 
and  he  brought  with  his  own  hand  the  money  in  a  certain  glove 
{cyrotechd)  and  paid  it  in  the  court  of  the  Prior  to  the  said  Prior. 
Wherefore  they  say  that  no  one  can  claim  common  there,  either 
of  herbage  or  mast,  except  at  the  will  of  the  said  Prior  and 
brethren.  {The  entry  stops  hcre^  but  in  a  different  hand  is  written 
Look  for  what  is  wanting  above  on  the  same  roll  by  such  a  sign. 
The  "  sign  "  is  a  neatly  drawn  little  picture  of  a  hawk.  We  find 
it  again  on  memb,  14^,  which  is  taken  next,  out  of  its  place ^  to 
preserve  the  continuity  of  the  story.) 


'jzc  -c  z 


•  VZZL 


J  rrj^  T-irT^zsLi:!  Crier  ir  'Avr'.rT'.  -^ai 


ni  Urr  ■  >  gii  cc  \V3rdBm, 


Abbess  cc  Sw   EcTnrd  w^s  scraraocec. 
Abbess  c.czes  a=d  say?  ib-ir  bier  =Ka  c?c  sodr  irxi  aoci:  a 
LiTs  il^^L}^  bad  rcdn^rc  tberc    .    .    .     vXzr  Icri  the  Kfag 
^s.'Ti  f.iT  p'A.ig'  to  tZ)c^  rTinc  .2^0  ^rec^jre^  cc  ^.iie  c 
bv  t:i^  i:*:r=<«ii  biicn'iir^es     .     .     .     2c  ^-.-e  ^  ^r 

te  ""  • 

c:ci— «:ci.      Wijec  tbe  Abbess   -w^is  asked  b^*  wb^r  i^bt 
dieted    crcusjc   tbere.   =cc^tb.ita3dfr:g    ibai   sbe    had   ^ac] 

-  Cn  -je  "lack  ix.  'Jos.  E*£er  ir  icrg  :r  ptt>  iiiir'ic  xmzbcvri  3;    " 

■       in. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  453 

possession,  she  says  for  this  right :  that  the  Prior  and  brethren 
had  common  on  the  lands  of  the  Abbess  in  such  and  such 
a  vill,  and  so  one  with  the  other.  To  this  it  is  answered  on 
the  part  of  our  lord  the  King  that  the  tenement  granted  by 
our  lord  the  King  to  the  Prior  and  brethren,  in  which  the  pasture 
is,  is  demesne  of  our  lord  the  King,  and  his  own  forest  and 
demesne,  and  in  which  no  one  may  appropriate  {yendicare)  or 
have  common  except  by  the  grace  of  our  lord  the  King,  [no  one] 
has  parcenary  or  neighbour,  nor  can  it  be  between  them,  as 
between  neighbours,  where  each  may  have  .  .  .  [common  ?] 
with  the  other,  and  in  the  demesne  of  our  lord  the  King  no  one 
has  common  except  by  the  grace  of  our  lord  the  King,  which 
grace  our  lord  the  King  may  revoke  if  he  will,  and  may  do 
what  he  will  in  the  matter. 


Memb.  i^d. 

Assizes  taken  at  Periton  on  Saturday  next  before  the  nativity 
of  the  Blessed  Mary,  before  H.  de  Bracton  and  his  com- 
panions, to  wit,  Henry  de  Erlegh',  Richard  de  Langport, 
the  Prior  of  St  Peter  of  Tanton',  and  others,  in  the  thirty- 
ninth  year  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

1522.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  William  Cosyn, 
Roger  Cole,  and  Hugh  le  Priur  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  Robert 
Fychet  of  his  free  tenement  in  la  Forde,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and 
whereon  it  is  complained  that  they  disseised  him  of  seventeen 
acres  and  a  half  of  land,  with  the  appurtenances,  in  the  same 
[vill],  and  of  which  he  says  that  he  was  seised  for  fifteen  years 
by  the  gift  of  Hugh  Fychet  his  father,  and  that  he  held  the 
same  fully  and  in  peace  until  the  said  William  Cosyn  and  the 
others  unjustly  and  without  judgment  disseised  him.  William 
does  not  come,  but  his  bailiff  comes  and  says  that  in  truth 
Robert  never  had  peaceful  seisin  of  the  said  land  by  the  said 
gift  of  his  father  unless  by  sufferance*  (per  eskekkiini)^  nor  did 

*  The  meaning  of  this  word  is  very  obscure.  In  Ducange,  Glossary,  it  is  given 
as  inquest,  or  jury,  but  the  illustration  there  given  does  not  support  this  rendering. 
It  may  be  a  corrupt  form  of  escapium.  For  example,  my  beasts  merely  escape  on  to 
vour  land ;  that  will  not  put  me  in  seisin.  So  if  I  taJce  heather  only  when  your 
bailiff  is  not  looking,  I  do  this  merely  by  way  of  *' escape."  Perhaps  the  word 
'*  sufferance  "  would  not  be  wrong  here,  and  I  think  that  it  would  not  be  out  of  place 
in  the  passage  from  Mat.  Paris  (see  vd.  It,  p.  50)  cited  in  Ducange. 


454  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 


he  ever  take  from  the  same  any  crop  except  of  heath,  galnetam^ 
and  the  like,  and  thereon  he  puts  himself  upon  the  assize.  The 
jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  Robert  Fychet  was  enfeoffed  of 
the  said  land  for  seven  years  last  past  by  the  gift  of  the  said 
Hugh  his  father,  and  when  he,  Robert,  would  till  his  land,  the  said 
William  and  the  others  came  and  took  his  plough.  So  they 
disseised  him  unjustly  and  without  judgment  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Robert  should  recover  his  seisin,  and  William 
and  the  others  are  in  mercy.* 

1523.  The  assize  comes  to  recognise  whether  Richard  de 
Fumeus  and  Guy  de  Tanton'  unjustly,  etc.  disseised  John  de 
Dokkel  and  Clarice  his  wife  of  their  free  tenement  in  Lekkes- 
worthy,  since  the  first,  etc.,  and  whereon  it  is  complained  that 
they  disseised  them  of  twelve  acres  of  land,  with  the  appur- 
tenances, in  the  same  [vill].  They  say  that  the  said  Richard, 
son  and  heir  of  the  said  Clarice,  gave  her  the  land  to  hold  for 
her  life,  and  which  land  she  held  fully  and  in  peace  by  the  said 
gift  for  seven  years  until  the  said  Richard  and  the  others  un- 
justly and  without  judgment  disseised  them.  Richard  does  not 
come,  but  Guy  comes,  and  says  that  in  truth  the  said  Richard 
de  Furneaus  enfeoffed  the  said  Clarice  his  mother  of  the  said 
land  as  is  aforesaid,  and  afterwards  went  into  Ireland  and  there 
married  a  certain  woman.  Afterwards,  with  his  wife,  his  sons 
and  his  household,  he  came  to  England,  to  wit,  to  the  house  of 
his  said  mother,  and  sought  hospitality  as  guests,  and  remained 
in  the  same  for  four  weeks.  When  Clarice  his  mother  saw 
that  she  was  overburdened,  by  such  a  household,  and  fully 
perceived  that  two  parts  of  the  said  land  were  not  sufficient  for 
their  support,  she  asked  that  Richard  her  son  would  give  her  two 
acres  of  land  to  hold  for  the  term  of  her  life,  together  with  one- 
third  part  which  she  held  as  her  dower.  For  such  she  would  give 
up  to  him  the  said  two  parts  for  the  support  of  himself  and  his 
household,  except  the  two  acres,  which  two  parts  she  thereupon 
gave  up  to  her  son  Richard  of  her  own  free  will,  and  he  was  in 
seisin  thereof  for  a  long  time,  and  afterwards  came  and  sold  the 
said  land  to  the  said  Guy ;   and  that  they  have  made  no  dis- 

*  I  am  not  clear  as  to  the  precise  meaning  of  this  word.  Perhaps  it  means  a  rushy 
growth  :  ^ttgulctum  from  gtilia,  a  rush  ;  Migne,  Lexicon.  Or  perhaps  it  may  mean 
broom.     Or,  again,  perhaps  it  is  equivalent  \ojampnum^  furze. 

^  In  the  margin  there  is  a  note— damages  2J.  -  concluding  with  *'  c,  /."  For  the 
significance  of  these  letters,  see  note  to  No.  1502. 


SOMERSETSHIRE   PLEAS.  455 

seisin,  except  as  is  aforesaid,  they  put  themselves  upon  the 
assize.  The  jurors  say  upon  their  oath  that  Clarice  gave  up  to 
Richard  her  son  of  her  free  will  the  said  two  parts  of  land 
as  is  aforesaid,  so  that  he  should  grant,  to  her  fully  one-third  part 
of  the  same  land  to  hold  by  the  name  of  dower,  and  the  said  two 
acres.  Wherefore  they  say  that  Richard  and  Guy  did  not 
disseise  them  unjustly  of  any  free  tenement  Therefore  it  is 
considered  that  Richard  and  Guy  be  quit,  and  John  and  Clarice 
are  in  mercy.  They  are  paupers,  and  are  pardoned  by  our  lord 
the  King. 

1524.  Master  Hubert  puts  in  his  place  Oliver  de  Dyneham 
or  Walter  de  Kynneye  against  Matilda,  formerly  the  wife  of 
Elias  de  Burton*. 


ROLL  No.  778.    (Hampshire.) 

The  date  of  this  roll  is  a.d.  1255-6. 

Memb.  i. 

Pleas  of  juries  and  assizes  at  Winchester  in  the  county  of 
Southampton  on  the  morrow  of  St  Hilary,  before  Gilbert  de 
Preston  and  his  companions,  justices  itinerant,  in  the  fortieth 
year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son  of  King  John. 

Memb,  30. 

Roll  of  attorneys  at  Winchester. 

1525.  Robert  Cherm  puts  in  his  place  Adam  de  Wedmor* 
against  the  master  of  the  Hospital  of  St.  Mary  Magdalene  in 
Heleweyweye  on  a  plea  of  lands,  etc. 

Memb.  32. 

Essoins  de  malo  lecti  taken  at  Winchester  on  the  morrow  of  St. 
Hilary,  in  the  fortieth  year  of  the  reign  of  King  Henry,  son 
of  King  John. 

Essoins  de  inalo  veniendi  taken  there  at  the  same  time. 

1526.  R.,  Earl  of  Gloucester  (/A/V  name  is  struck  out,  and  aver 
is  written  Quentin  the  clerk,  attorney)  against  Joan,  formerly 


4S6  SOMERSETSHIRE  PLEAS. 

the  wife  of  Nicholas  de  Hamleg'  on  a  plea  of  dower  by  Thomas 

the  Serjeant  on (after  this  is  written)  No  day  yet  because 

on  the  octave  of  St.  Hilary.^     Richard  de  Hadlow,  the  other 
attorney,  against  the  same  by  Thomas  Beaufiz. 

Memb.  yid. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  the  same  place  on  the  octave 
of  St  Hilary. 

1527.  Quintin  the  clerk,  attorney  of  R.,  Earl  of  Gloucester, 
against  Joan,  formerly  the  wife  of  Nicholas  de  Hanlee,  on  a  plea 
of  dower,  by  Michael  de  Bumevill.  On  the  quindene  of  Easter 
at  Wylton*,  by  pledge  of  John  de  Rammes'.  Richard  de  Haulo, 
the  other  attorney  on  the  same,  by  John  Peche  by  the  same 
pledge.  The  same  day  is  given  to  Walter  de  Burges,  whom  the 
Earl  vouched  to  warranty,  by  his  attorney,  in  banco.  Let  Walter 
de  Burges,  whom  the  said  Earl  vouched  to  warranty,  be  required 
to  present  himself 

Memb.  33. 

Essoins  de  malo  veniendi  taken  at  Winchester  on  the  morrow  of 
the  Purification  of  the  Blessed  Mary. 

1528.  William  de  Cuvert*  for  himself  and  Mary,  in  whose 
place,  etc.,  against  Alice,  formerly  the  wife  of  Richard  Luvel,  on 
a  plea  of  waste,  by  John  Dod.  In  one  month  after  Easter  at 
Wilton*.  He  has  pledged  his  faith.  The  same  day  is  given  to 
Robert  Haket  and  Alice  his  wife,  parties  {participibus\  with 
William  and  Mary,  by  Alice's  attorney  in  banco.  And  be  it 
known  that  the  aforesaid  {sic)  Peter  de  Gatesden  and  Cecily, 
Ralph  de  Sancto  Audoeno  and  Godelech'  his  wife,  the  other 
parties  with  William  and  Mary,  do  not  sue,  etc.,  and  they  were 
summoned.  And  Alice  does  not  come  as  appears  by  the  pleas.* 
Let  Peter  de  Gatesden*  and  Cecily  his  wife,  Ralph  de  Sancto 
Audoeno  and  Godelech*  his  wife,  Robert  Haket  and  Alice  his 
wife,  parties,  be  required  to  present  themselves.* 

*  I  think  that  the  whole  of  this  entry  is  probably  intended  to  be  strock  out.    See 
below  No.  1527  on  the  octave  of  Hilarv. 

*  Over  this  name  is  written  **■  quef, 

'  In  the  margin  here  is  **  ^jt'  *   i.e.  cxi^tur, 

*  That  is,  "  exr  "  in  the  margin. 


INDEX    OF    MATTERS. 


[The  references  are  to  paragraphs^  except  where  otherwise  stated^ 


Abandonment  of  action,  355- 
61,  363-9*  373.  377-9, 434- 

5.  437»  450,  451,  452,  459, 
460,  471,  472,    473,    475, 

476,  478,  483,  484,  488, 
492,  506,  508,  518,  522, 
527,  537,  539,  S40,  55o, 
565,  5^7,  575,  578-80,  584, 
586,  590,  591,  595,  619, 
623,  624,  626,  631,  657- 
60,  662-4,  667,  683,  684, 
685,   687,    694-702,    704, 

7o|,  709,  719-24,  731-5, 
738,     looi,     1440,     1443, 

1450,     1454,    1460,    147 1, 
1498,  1499,  1500,  >504- 
Abatement  by  death  of  party, 

375,     1441,     1442,     1445. 

«5i3,  1515- 
Abduction,  944. 

Abjuration  of  realm,  p.  Ivi.  148, 
166,  185,  189,  191,  205, 
231,  250,  263,  747,  748, 
755,  785,  795,  797,  804, 
819,  823,  827,  842,  847, 
849,  884,  895,  907,  910, 
911,  942,  958,  960,  987, 
1008,  1066,  1077,  1087, 
1 108,  1144,  1 153,  1 1 58, 
1221,  1244,  1254,  1255, 
1264. 

Absence  beyond  seas,  23,  32, 
321,  812. 

Aesnacia^  Eynesciay  380,  713. 

Affidarcj  48. 

Age  for  battle,  past  the,  1025. 

Agreement  without  licence, 
864,934,  looi,  1067,  II 15. 
1 118,  1218. 


Amercements  : — 
loi,  383,   1292,  1419, 

1463. 
for  disseisin,   24,    efc. 

See  under  '*  Assize  of  novel 

disseisin." 
for  false  claim,  26,  33, 

302,    331,  334,    338,   339. 

353.  354,  394^. 

for  foolish  speech,  etc., 


320,  467,  829. 

pardoned,     164,     303, 


321,  436,  1424,  1481. 

for    unjust    detention, 

28,   etc.     See  under   **  As- 
size    of      moit      d'ances- 


i> 


tor. 
unlawful,      276,      814, 

973. 
Bishop  amerced  for  escape  of 

prisoner,  1255. 

Coroners  amerced,  84,  796, 

797. 
G>unty  amerced,   554,   784, 

912,  939,  969. 
Jurors  amerced,  171a,  394^» 

394;,  394'',  472,  474,  551, 


753,  757, 

790.  793, 

906,  909, 

938,  948, 


7F' 
781, 

891, 

930, 

985, 
1042, 

IIOI, 

1 140, 

"55, 
1 169, 

1212,    1215, 

1234,  1246,  1455- 


766,  771, 

876,  880, 

916,  921, 

949,  966, 


1022, 
1062, 
nil, 
1142, 
II 58, 

"79, 


1030, 
1064, 

1 1 15, 

1144, 
1 162, 

1 196, 
1217, 


1040, 

1071, 

"34, 

"53, 
1 167, 

1208, 

1221, 


Amercements — {cotU, ) — 

Jurors  amerced  for  not 
answering  the  articles  of  the 
eyre,  11 56. 

Juror  not  coming.  See  De- 
Suiters  and  jurors  amerced. 

Persons  amerced  for  not  pro- 
ducing chattels,  1 102. 

for  not  taking  an 

offender,  1145. 

Sheriff  amerced,  84,  516. 

Suitors  amerced.  Sec  De- 
faulters. 

Tithing  amerced  for  insufh- 
cient  attendance  at  inquest, 
814. 

Township  amerced  for  not 
appraising  chattels,  942. 

for    not    coming, 

882,  1 2 16. 


for  escape  of  pri- 
soner, 1094,  1 138. 
for  harbouring  evil- 
doers, 770,  771,  923,  965, 
972,1049,  1 153,  1178,1184, 
1216,  1231,  1243,  1244. 

for    omitting    to 

present,  935. 

for  not  presenting 

to  county  court,  880,  1042, 
1 148,  II 54. 

for  not  producing 


chattels,  1 148. 

to    pursue    or     take 

offender,  neglect  of-—  189, 
207,  764,  772,  773,    842f 
847,  874,  884,  907,   9" 
940,  967,  99a.  i«>8,  1027 
i028y   io32»    10349   loift- 

3  N 


4S8 


INDEX  OF   MATTERS. 


1087,    1 1 24,    1 144,    1 163, 

1171,    1 196,    1 198,    1221, 

1222,  1224,  1225.    Se€B\so 

under  **  Frankpledge." 
Amifa,  456,  596,  609. 
Appeal,  p.  1. 
for  beating,  865,  929, 

979ti079, 1097,1181, 1 187, 

1207,  1226. 
for  breach  of  the  peace, 

854.    855,  856,   858,  995, 

996,997,998.  1090,  1 1 15. 

for  burning  house,  1082. 

for  death  of  husband, 

89.  92,  94,  846.  939,  981, 

1082,  1 145,  1 184. 

of  felony,  901,  1033. 

of  homicide,  81?,  87,  91, 

93.  98,  99.  167,  872,  940. 

991,  1182,  1200,1216,  1217. 

of  inciting,  962,  1 218. 

inquest  after  failure  of, 

820. 
quashed,    87,    8ao,    p. 

136,   852.  858,   865,    929. 

1015,  1057,  1 181,  1226. 
of  rape,  794,  848,  881, 

885.  887,  934,  963,  989. 

'05S»    1056,     1057,    1065, 

1067,    1118,     1120,    1121, 

1 136,  1180,  1256. 
of    receipt    of    stolen 

goods,  109,  no. 
— •—  of  robbery,  84,  88,  105, 

107,  108,  208,  853,  873, 

908,  941,  978,  980,  982. 

989,  looi,  loio,  ion,  1012, 

1013,  1015,  1016,  1025, 

lOSo,      1097,      1 147,      IKO, 

nsi,    1175.    "81,    1187, 

1218. 
by    woman.     See    also 

under  other  heads  of  Appeal, 

167. 
where  lies,    929, 

979. 


of  wounds,  86,  91,  811, 
812,  820,  864.  908,  912, 
929,  941,  962,  lOOI,  loio, 
I02S,  1033,  I0S3,  1104, 
1131,  1175,  1194,  1219, 
1223. 

for  wrongful  impound- 
ing, 852. 


Approver,  p.  Hi.  104- 1 12,  799, 
800,  930,  1252. 

Arbitration,  1440. 

Armiger,  II51. 

Arrest,  private,  1017,  1060. 

Articles  of  the  Eyre,  p.  xxxix. 

Assize  of  cloth,  806, 828,  1075, 
1092,  1248,  1262. 

postponed,  294. 

of   Wine,     790,    828, 

1058,  1075,  1093,  no6, 
1 172,  1247,  1 261,  1263. 

Attachment,  392,  393. 

by  shenff  onlered  not- 
withstanding Bishop's  li- 
berty, 137a 

Attorney,  appointments  of,  2, 

3.  13.  15,  loi^  102,  103, 

294,  332.  349.  350.  374. 
394tf,  42a:,  420*,  426-30 

439. 440, 441,  443-7, 461-6, 
479-82,  493-5.  514.  515. 
517,  541-7,  557-61,  570, 
571,581-3,  612,  613.  637 
42,  676,  677,  742,  1267, 
1297,  1301,  1313,  1316, 

1317,  1345.  1352,  1356, 

1357,  1363,  1420,  1422, 

1435,  1453,  1461,  1462. 

1473,  1474.  1492,  1517. 

1518.  1519,  1520,  1524, 
1525. 

Auca^  891. 

Aurtfaber^  697,  908,  1038. 

Austurcarius^  8,  43. 

Baco,  688. 

Baliia^  302.  362. 

Baierellust  1 148. 

Bath,  claim  of  the  citizens  of, 

P-.I34. 
Battcium^  basticium,  1427. 

Battle,  p.  li.  p.  136,  533,  564, 
n94,  1223. 

Beating,  760,  761,  762. 

Bedellusy  431. 

Beheading  of  thieves,  wrong- 
ful, 990. 

Bereman^  166. 

Berkariusy  2J2,  383. 

Berker  Uf  1 1 82. 

Bersator^  143. 

Bigis^  cum  camttis  ei,  52a 

BUttrotus^  686. 


Boar-pig,  1039. 

Bound  \ij  evildoers,  person, 
751.765,776,927. 

Boundary,  breaking  down 
county,  983. 

Bow  and  arrows,  lOOi. 

Bristol,  no  assize  of  mort 
d'anccstor  in,  525. 

mayor's  chapel,  618. 

Brusura,  243,  277. 

Burgagium^  41a 

Burglary,  84,  88,  134,  171a, 
250,  251,  274,  276,  776, 
781,  785,  845,  965,  969, 
992,  1007,  1009,  1030, 
1032,  1034,  1040,  1041, 
1062,  1081,  12^ 

Burial  without  view  of  coro- 
ners, 744,  860,  900,  975, 
977,1170,1178,1195,1198, 
1202,    1213,     1214,    1246. 

Burning  of  house,  769,  771, 

900,925,952,  "12,  "95- 
Busoncs,  p.  xliv. 

Catn€rarius^  398,  569,  605. 

Campiparsy  1497. 

Cape,  534. 

Carei'iarius,  414,  452,  215. 

Cariare^  1 436. 

Carpentarius^  569. 

Carrettis  $t  bigis^  cum,  520. 

CarucariuSf  197. 

Carucator^  343. 

Caudera,  803. 

Cavilem^  lOOi. 

Cavilla^  lOOl. 

CelUrariuSf  1 151. 

Certification,  process  of,  1491* 

1514.    See  also  *' Attaint  of 

lury." 
Chacia,  1436. 
Ckacwre^  1436. 
Chalonem,  lOOi. 
Champar^  1497. 
Champion,  533,  564. 
Charterhouse     of     Widtia, 

foundation  of,  I  cat. 
Chattels,  action  tor  iccowry 

of,  1334- 
Cheveron,  572. 
CkimynOy  1274. 
Churches  in  KWs  gift,  l 
Qergy,  benefit  o(  pb  M. 


INDEX  OF   MATTERS. 


459 


Qerk  committed  to  the  ordi- 
n«y»  84,  89,  93,  939, 
1175. 

aegradation  of,  825. 

CocMs,  514,  556,  632. 

Cdfa  iurtosiay  looi. 

Corns,  dippiiig,  1105. 

CommisBioii  to  justices,  pp. 
zzzviii.  xli.  p.  26. 

Committal  of  suspected  per- 
son  to  tithing,    134,    139, 

MS- 
Common  of  pasture,  292,  301, 

307,  322,  325.  333.  346. 
394^.  394».  394/f  394«», 
394^.453.  468,  469,  487. 
503.  531.  55O'  552.  590. 
626,650,652-5,673,    678, 

682,  730,  734.  903.  905. 
1 134,  1272,  1275,  1287, 
1426,  1437,  1438,  1454, 
1470,  1501,  1502,  1509, 
1521. 

Compui]ption,  572. 

Confession  by  offender,  216. 

Set  also  Abjuration. 

Constable  protecting  thieves, 

371. 
Conversus^  443. 

Ccoptrtorium^  1 001. 

CoHfilUr^  189. 

Comeysier^  604. 

CormvaUis^  604. 

Coroner,  deputy,  827. 

election  of,  381. 

Coroners,  p.  xxxii.  807. 

names  of,  1035. 

See  also  Cusiodfs. 

Cosinage,  action  of,   p.   Ixv. 

672.  715. 

Costs,  1464. 

Country,  condition  of  the,  p. 
Ixxiii. 

County  court,  complaint  not 
attached  in,  1019. 

record  of  proceed- 
ings in,  293,  741. 

testimony  of  the,  86,  £8, 

90.  95.  730. 
Courts  : — 
Manor,  p.  xxiv. 
llnndrea,  p.  xxviii. 
County,  p.  xzxi. 
Royal,  p.  xxxiii. 


Covenant,  action  on  a,  620^ 
659,  670,   732.  738.   1348. 

1375.  1386,  1415.  1421. 
Coverlet,  looi. 
Cnue  signatus,  302,  334. 
Cumin,  damages  in,  6. 
Curtesy  of  England,  1431. 
Custodcs    of   the    Bishop    of 

Bath,  1370. 

placttarum  cof'one,  84, 92. 

See  also  Coroners. 

Customs,  new,  919, 1240, 1259. 
and  services,  420^,  420m, 

709,  741,  1240,  1351. 

Dam,  raising  of,  394 'r. 
Damages    for    disseisin,  24, 

etc   See  under  *'  Assize  of 

novel  disseisin." 

pardoned,  296,  307. 

taxed,  1325. 

Darrein  presentment,  assixe  of, 

p.  Ixvu.  310,  391,  393,  395, 

1383.  1384. 
Dead,  found,  746,  756,  951, 

966,  985,  988,  1078.   1083, 

1084,    1 1 14,     1 1 32,     1 146, 

1201,  1212. 

Debt,    action    of,    457,   728, 
1284,  1372,  1416. 

admission  of,   574,  675, 

689,  717,  718,  129a 

Deceiving  the  court,  1514. 

Deer,  damage  by,  327. 

Defaulters  to  be  amerced, 
286-291,  436,  750,  763, 
768,  779,  789.  8k, 
841,  857,  862,  868, 
889,  902,  935.  946, 
964.  974.  976,  984. 
1026,    1038,     1050, 


821, 

876. 

955. 
1000, 

1054, 

1071, 
1 1 28, 

1 164, 
11^9, 
1229, 


1059,    1063,     1069, 
1091,    1098,     1 107, 

1 1 37,    "49.     1156. 

1165,    I 166,     1173, 

1 193,     1204,     I2I0, 

1241,  1249,  1251. 
Deforcing  of  inheritance,  592. 
Demesnes,  royal,  749, 904. 
Deodand,   p.  Iviii.  775,  798, 

802,  803,  832,  863.  876, 

878,  879,  883,  891,  892, 

894,  897.  9I4»  9>5.  917. 
918,  922,  926,  935,  937, 


947.  948,  950.  961,  970, 
IC02,  IC03,  1005,  IC06, 

IO3I,  1039,  IO4I,  lOM, 
1070,  1073,  1076,  1085, 
1 1 10,  1 1 17,  1 122,   1 130, 

"55.    "83,    1199,    1213, 
1220,  1233, 1246. 
Deposit  of  charter  with  third 

person,  717,  718,  1431. 
Deprivation  by  Legate,  1384. 
Descriptions      ok       Per- 
sons:— 

Baker,  114,  564,  569. 

Broker,  385. 

Carpenter,  383,  569. 

Carter,  912. 

Chamberlain,  569. 

Cobbler,  965. 

Cook,  382,  563,  564,  969. 

Cordwainer,  604. 

Crusader,  334,  1457. 

Draper,  lOOi. 

Fisherman,  383,  604. 

Forester,  226,924,  971. 

Goldsmith,  394///,  697,  699. 

Harper,  213. 

Hayward,     604,    617,    771, 
1 116. 

Horn -maker,  604. 

Hundredman,  604. 

Lay  brother,  780. 

Leech,  gs^. 

Mercer,  665. 

Messer,  771. 

Miller,  383,  604,  912. 

Minstrels,  213. 

Palmer,  388,  604,  624. 

Plough-driver,  569. 

Ploughman,  420a. 

Shepherd,  385. 

Smith,  569. 

Steward,  735. 

Tailor,  383,  604,  934. 

Tanner,  610. 

Usher,  508,  720. 

Vintner,  569. 

W'arrener,  383. 

Weaver,  604,  795. 
Disseisin  **  within  the  sum- 
mons," S99,  607. 
Distress,  60^,  706,  728,  853, 
1284,  1302,  1325.  i332. 
1335.  '339.  "341.  i378. 
1415.  >4»7.  1421. 


46o 


INDEX  OF  MATTERS. 


Domina  et  heres^  592. 

Dower,  action  for,  18, 420^, 
420/,  4202,  485,  486,  538, 
601,  618,  649,  656,  657, 
658,  661,  662,  666,  719, 
720,  724,  725,  727,  1276. 
1281,  1304,  1306,  1318, 
1319,    1320,     1321,    1322, 

1332,  1333,  1342,  1350, 
I359f    1360,     1364,    1367. 

'368,  1373,  1387.  1389, 
1390. 

Draparius^  100 1. 

Drawbridge,  1 01 7. 

Drowned,  found,  752,  774, 
859,  860,  882.  893,  928, 
975.  1004,  1064,  1089, 
1096,    nil,     II 16,    1154, 

1157,  1 179. 
Dyke  raised,  313,   327,  348, 
500,    502,   520,   552,    565, 
599,  608,  1432,  I4S0. 

Ecclesiastical  court,  prohibi- 
tion of  suit  in,  420ts,  1298, 
1299,  1300,  1302,  1307, 
»3o8,  1323,  1365,  1370, 
1392,  1418. 

Ejectment,  566,  644. 

EUmosinariay  618. 

Englishry,  pp.  Ivii.  lix.  App. 

B»  155.  743,  814,  816,  833. 

En  sent  f  1 00 1. 

Entry,  writ  of,  p.  Ixviil.  394^, 
420«,  42q>',  499,  522,  523, 
530,  60s,  615,  617,  632, 
667,  674,  679,  680,  695, 
73»»  735,  1273,  1283,  1286, 
1288, 1305. 

EscaUra,  313. 

Escape  of  evildoer  from 
sanctuary,  785,  11 19,  1253. 

from    prison,    122,    147, 

148,  168,  177,  185,  240, 
250,  258,  276,  284,  839, 
1094. 

of       prisoner,       bishop 


amerced  for,  1255. 
Escheat,  904,  1036,  1228. 

claim  to  an,  619,  1285. 

Essoins,  p.  Ixix.  46-83,  382, 

420a,  691. 
Beyond   seas.    23,   32,   382, 

1459- 


Essoins — {cont,) — 
Service  of  the  King,  p.  Ixix. 

23i  32,  382. 
Cruce  signaii,  p.  Ixx. 
de  malo  lectin  p.   Ixix.  511, 
585,  665,  1344,  1347,  1376. 
de    malo    ventendi,   p.    Ixix. 
382.  394^394^.  4201, 420.?- 
420/,      420/-42ajr,      1268. 
12^,  1293,    1294-6,  1309- 
16,      1326-1331,       1336-8, 
1346,     1414,    1526,    IS27, 
1528. 
Estovers,  action  for,  704. 
Exchange  of  land,  438,  713, 

1350. 
Exclusay  714. 
Excommunicated  person, 

1280,  1302,  1307,  14 18. 
Executor,  342. 
Extent  and  valuation  of  land,  , 

380,  1350. 
Eyre,   attendance    on  the,  p. 

xliii. 
proceedings  on    the,   p. 

xliii. 

Faber^  569,  901. 

Factor  rogorum,  12$. 

Fairs,  1240. 

Falling   sickness,   796,    121 1, 

1245. 
Felony,  p.  I. 
Fera,  327. 
Fides y  719,  848. 
Filum^  211. 

Fine,  compromise  by,  p.  Ixxi. 
caption  of  a,  311. 

day    given    for    taking 

chirograph,  1354,  1381. 

levied  in  inferior  court, 

293. 

suit  to  observe,  602,  697, 

1335,     1339,    1341,     1353. 

1371,  1378,  1417. 
Fines,  particulars  of,  312,  507, 

602,  644,  653,  713,  1291, 

1302,  1368,  1505,  1507. 

Su  *•  Licence  to  agree." 

Fisheries,  787,  818,  p.  134. 
Flight  in  panic,  994,  1074. 
Focaliunif  572. 
Forest,  justices  of  the,  143. 
Fortia,  188. 


Franchise  taken  into   King's 

hand,  164. 
Frankpledge,  p.  xxix. 
not  in,  because  a  clerk, 

273.  1095. 

not  in,  because  tree,  846, 


981. 

not    in,  because    not 

resident,     146,    226,    261, 

273t  279.  etc. 

offenders        tithing 

amerced,  86,  90,  166,  169, 
182,  214,  217,  236,  242, 
248,  257,  266.  268,  270, 
277,  281,  285,  etc 

township      amerced 

because  person  not  in,  223, 

770,  795.  923,  953.  "049. 
none  in  Ilchester,  372. 


Frater  predicator^  813. 
Frtutus^  1353. 
Fugitive,  harbouring,  1 31. 
Fugitives,  p.  liiL 
Fumunif  068. 

Gallows  raised,  870,  871. 

GarciOy  128,  256. 

Glaston,  abbot    of,  claim   to 

jurisdiction,  p.  134. 
Grand  Assize,  the,  p.   lx\'iii, 

330.  394/".  396-420,  421  5» 

510,  587. 
Grant  of  land  admitted,  1289, 

1483,  1484. 
Grute^  810,  894. 
Guests  killed,  826. 

Hachia  adpykum,  929. 

Hate  and  spite,  745,  791, 929, 

954. 
HaubcrruySf  569. 

Hauberk,  looi. 

Haya^  1007. 

Hedge,  1007. 

Holy  Land,  seisin  on  departure 

for,  1457. 

Homage  and  reliefs,  687,  706, 

733. 
Homicide,  100,  I14, 115,  131, 

147,  152,    153.    154,  IJ9. 

164,  172a,   181,   182,  185, 

186,  188,    190,    192,  196, 

202,  203,   204,    207,  210, 

212,  215,   216,    218,  224, 


INDEX  OF  MATTERS. 


461 


225,  229,  231,  232,  233, 

237,  24C^   247,  248,  255, 

256,   260,  .273,  275,  280, 

2S1,   285,  748.  755,  764, 

770,  771,  773.  784.  801. 
804,  809,  817,  826,  834. 
837,  842,  874,  910.  93^ 
932,  933.  957,  959.  967. 
968,  969,  972,  1028,  1029, 
1030,  1042,  1062,  1066, 
1077,  1087,  1 100,  IIOI, 
1102,  1 108,  1 109,  1 124, 
1141,  1145,  1171,  1191, 
1 196,  1 198,  1206,  1209, 
1217, 1222,  1224,  1243. 

Hostiarius^  508,  527,  1 127. 
Su  also  OsHarius. 

Hue  and  cry,  95,  1448. 

Hundreds  of  &)merset,  App. 
A. 

Hundred  court,  hanged  by, 
785. 

—   persons    charged 

with  "  foolish  behaviour " 
before,  827. 

Ilchester,  no  frankpledge  in, 

372. 
Indictment,     amercement     of 

individual  for  false,  932. 

Infancy,  p.   xxii.    490,    496, 

497. 
In$uc^  1448. 

Inquest,  loio,  173,  247,  385, 
507,   714,    729.    85  a, 


865,  929,  939,  1057, 
I181,     1276,     1288,    132J, 
1389.  1392,  1482,  1521. 
—  on  death,  p.  Ivii. 
unUwful,  973,  1037. 


Intrusion,  572. 
Itintrans^  203,  784. 

Jacket,  leather,  looi. 
ews,  p.  xxii. 
udgment,  fdse,  293. 
Juraia  and  assisa,  p.  Ixiv. 
Juror,  improper  person  elected 

a«,938. 
^-^  release  from  service  as, 

1511. 
Jurors,  convicting: — 
of   hundred    and  four  vills, 

164,    165,   180,    201,    267, 


Jurors,  convicting — (coni.) — 
272,   274,  278,   944.    956, 

993.  1009,  1044. 1082, 1097. 
1174,  1206,  1232. 
of  three  hundreds  and  five 
vills,  152. 

of  hundred  and  five  vills,  124. 
twelve  jurors  with  the  whole 

hundred,  140,  142. 
of    two    hundreds    and    the 
townships,  171a. 

duties  of,  p.  xlvi. 

selection  of,  p.  xlv. 

negligence  of,  164,  830. 

Jury,  attaint  of,  394/,  487, 627, 
p.  431.  See  also  "  Certifica- 
tion, process  of." 

p.  xvii. 

Justices  of  the  Forest,  11 34. 

itinerant,  p.  xxxviL 

not  all  present,  395. 

Killed,  found,  204,  206,  209, 
772,930.  1086,  1099,  II 78, 
1205. 

KiveUurttf  lOOl. 

KnipttluSt  804,  972. 

Lahedayet  602. 

Land  taken  into  King's  hand, 

18,  40.  43.  79.  708,  715. 
1276,  1278,  1281,  1282, 
1306,  1319.  1320,  1332, 
1342,  1359,  1364,  1367. 

Law,  put  to,  looi. 

wager   of,   80,  88,   91, 

100,  347,  etc..  1307,  1325. 

Leap  year  in  essoin,  1376. 

Leche,  572. 

Lepers,  p.  xxii. 

Lescheria^  572. 

Lethc^  572. 

Liberties,  King's  officers 
excluded    from,    149,    164, 

394^,999. 
Licence  to  agree,  305,  4200, 

477.  486,  498,  499.  505. 
512,  513,   526,    531,    532. 

533.  535.  536,  548,  553, 
555.  556.  573.  596,  597. 
609,  611,  614,   621,    622, 

628-30,  633-6,  645-8,  650, 
669,   670,  6S1,    688,    692, 

693.  703,  711-3,  736,  739. 


1281,     1283,     1302,    1340, 
1353,  "368,  1380,  1505. 
Limitation,  period  of,  pp.  Ixiv. 
hcv.  6,  298,  301,  431,  454, 

470. 
Linieam^  lOOi. 
**  Lord  and  heir,"  592. 
Lorica,  569,  lOOl. 
LotriXy  904. 

Mainnast,  p.  xxx.  86,  151, 
188,    192,   780,    846,    931, 

940,  953.  959.   981,    990, 

1112,     1136,    1145,    1161, 

1203. 
Mainprise,    745,    765,    1302, 

144a 
ManenSy  784,  91a 
Manutergium^  1068. 
Atarlera,  352,  1084. 
Marlpit,  352,  1084,  1 2 14. 
Marriage  of  wards  and  ladies, 

420^,  898,  1048,  1088, 1188, 

1503. 
Mayhem,  lOOi. 

MedicuSy  955. 

Mercer^  /p,  6i56. 

Mes sarins f  771. 

Messer^  /<?,  1151. 

Minors.  861,  1228. 

Misadventure,  death  by,  766, 

769.  775,  793,  796,  802, 
810,  813,  831,  832,  833. 

838,  843,  844.  863,  876, 
878,  879,  883,  891,  892. 

894,  897,  914.  915,  917. 
918,  922,  926,  928,  935, 

937,  947,  948,  95c,  952, 
961,  970,  975.  "002,  1003, 
1005,  1006,  1022,  1031, 
1039,  1041,  1052,  1070, 
1073,  1076,  1085,  mo, 
nil,  1 117,  1122,  1130, 
"55.  "69,  1183,  1 199, 
121 1,  1213,  1214,  1220, 
1233,  '246. 

AlolutiSf  569. 

AlanasUrium,  148,  205. 

Money,  value  of,  p.  Ixxii. 

Aforbms  caducMS,  J^f  1 211. 

Mort  d'ancestor,  assize  of, 
p.  Ixv.  5,  7,  10,  16,  19,  20, 

21.  25-38,  316,  343.  362, 
432-8,  454,  455,  456,  470, 


462 


INDEX   OF   MATTERS. 


473,  475.  476,  496,  497, 

501,  519,  524,  525,  527. 
551.  562,  563,  588,  593, 
594f  606,  610,  625,  1270, 

1277.  1449,  1457,  1458, 
149 1,  1494,  1503. 

Mudiner^  604. 

Afutur,  /p,  863,  912,  1086, 
1099,  iro8. 

**  Murder,"  p.  Iviii.  744,  746, 
755.  756.  764.  766,  772, 
774.  803,  813,  814,  816, 
833.  836,  859,  875.  880, 
882,  886,  893,  913.  921. 
928.  930,  951,  959,  966, 
969*  986,  icx>4,  1028,  1029, 
1042,  1066,  1078,  1083, 
1096,  1 1 14,  1123,  1 132, 
1 142,  1 146,  1157,  1 170. 
1179,  1201,  1205,  1215, 
1236,  124s. 

Naifiy,  444,  535,  729. 

Names  of  persons,  p.  Ixxiii. 

Norman  lands,  1036,  1228. 

Novel  disseisin,  assize  of,  p. 
Ixiii.  6,  9,  24,  39,  292,  295, 
298.  299,  300,  301,  302, 
303,  306,  307,  308,  309, 
i^2,  313,  314,  315,  317, 
321,   322.   323,    325,    328, 

329,  330.  333.  334.  335, 
336,  337,  338.  340-2,  346, 
35 »,   352,  353,    354.    37^, 

394.  394^-394/.  394^.  43>. 
448,  449,  453,    458,    468, 

469,  472,   474,    483,   487, 

502,  503,  506,  qoS,  518, 
521,  552,  565.  567-9.  576. 
577,  589,  598,  W,  600. 
604,  607,  626,  627,  1274, 
1275,  1279,  1280,  1287, 
1291,  1423,  1424,  142s, 
1426,     1427,     1428,    1429, 

«430,  1431.  1433.  1434, 

1436,  1437,  1438,  1439. 

1440,  1444,  1446,  1447, 

1448,  1451,  1452.  1454, 

1464,  1465,  1466,  1467, 

1469,  1470,  1472,  1475, 

1476,  1477,  1478,  1479. 

1 48 1,  i486,  1487,  1488, 

148Q,  1490,  1493,  1495, 

1496,  1497.  i50'»  "502, 


1506.  1507, 
1510,  1512, 
1522,  1523. 


1508,    1509, 
1514,    1516. 


Official    ordered    to    produce 

party,  1361. 
01  la  dt  terra,  1 169. 
Ordeal,  88,  91,  95,  loa 
Orfeuer,  /p,  699. 
Osier  bed,  329. 
OstiariuSy  72a     See  9\%oHos- 

tiarius. 
Outlawed,  treated  as  if,  X47, 

177.  189,  194,240,258. 
Outlawry,  p.  xxxiiL  86, 95, 122, 
123,    129,    139.    I5».    159. 
174,   176,  177. 
183,    186,    187, 
192,    196,    199, 
203,   210,   212, 


i»i, 
188, 
200, 

213, 


172^1 
182, 

190. 
202, 

214,  215,  217-19,  223,  225, 
226,  229,  241,  242, 
249,  256,  257,  259, 
261,  266,  268,  270, 
273,  275,  277,  279. 
744,  757,  770,  773, 
784,  788,  794,  801, 
834,  844,  846,  851, 
872,  873,  896.  899, 
923,  924,  933.  939, 
959.  967,  968,  972, 
1049,  1062,  1086, 
1099,  1 100,  IIOI, 
1 109,  1 1 12,  1 1 13, 
1 126,  1 133,  1 136, 
1144,  1 145,  1 161, 
1 182,  1 184,  1 191, 
1 196,  1 198,  1200, 
1209,  1216,  1217, 

1224,  I23I,  1239.  1243. 

Outlaws,  pp.  xxiii.  liv. 


248, 
260, 
271, 
284, 
777. 
817, 
866, 

920, 

940, 
1029, 

1095. 
1 102, 

1124, 

"43, 
1 1 78, 

1 192, 

1208, 

1222, 


Palmerus,  624. 

Pafinus,  798. 

Parcus,  352. 

Parem/ela,  729. 

Parmenter,  ie,  368,  435,  604, 

I4S6. 
Partition  of  lands,  38a 
Party,  failure  for  want  of,  298, 

344. 
Pauffier,  /e,  128,  141,  604. 

^^i/f».  943.  944- 
Pelliparius^  240. 


PescAur,  /?,  90S. 

Pescur,  604. 

Pestur,  /r,  1207. 

Pillcnum,  798. 

Piscatory  1 456. 

/^•j/<»r,  564,  569,  1 151. 

Placia,  145 1. 

Pleading,   variation    in,   457, 

50a 
Plbdgbs  :— 

to  deraign  and  defend. 

i"*^**  Battle." 

for  fines,  amercements, 

damages,  etc,  9,  24,  303, 

309,  351.  353.  394A.  394/. 
394^,  394/.  394»,  431.  435. 

450,  460,  475,   486,  487. 

492,  496,  497,  499.  503. 

507.  510,   5i«.  513.  5'9. 

526,  531.  533.  539.  540. 

548,  550,  552.   553t  565. 
etc 


persons    to    be    put 

under,  1 25,  126,  1 27,  130, 
140,  145,  158,  208,  272, 
etc. 

for  production  of  per- 
sons amerced,  92,  240,  383, 
762,  765,  766,  794»  811, 
833.  882,  921,  931,  940, 
9<>2,  971.  977.  980,  989. 
1023,  1 1 17.  1 1 19.  »»50, 
1 206.  See  also  "  Mainpast  ^ 
and  **  Mainprise." 

to  prosecute   amerced. 

See  under  **  Abandonment  of 
action." 

Plumbum,  935. 

Poachers,  harbouring,  143. 

Pontem  tumaUium^  1017. 

Pound,  352. 

Prepositus,  93. 

Presentation  to  church  :  ac- 
tion against  archdeacon, 
1265. 

Promise  to  prosecute,  719. 

Punfaude,  1439. 

Purcellus,  1039. 

Purprestures,  786,  818,  870, 
871,  888,  903,  946,  1258. 

Purse,  cutting  At  158* 

Qttarrera,  352. 

Quo  JVarran/oprceetdvnB^,  I. 


^HHBW 

Rape,  11*.  794. 

Treasuretrove,  759.1140- 

Record,    sumnioiis    to    hear, 

730.  nn- 

VZ^;.X'"'""- 

im- 

and   setvioe,  609,   706, 

Redcliff.  dwellera  in.  80S. 

1378. 

Tutart.  U.  928, 

pfeaiof.p.  13s. 

Templars  of,  79S. 

Suit,  withheld,  778.  S68,  999. 

Turf,  claim  to  lake,  714. 

10416,  1047,  iisa. 

Turkish  coifii,  looi, 

Kelaxacit,  609. 

Summons  :- 

Religious,  Ihe,  p.  xx. 

Service  on  recognitor,  347. 

"  Utrum."  the  assite,  n.  Ixvi, 

hibil,  assumption  of  the, 

Proof  of  service,  318,  347- 

326. 

38. 

Suptrtvnita,  1001. 

Rent  or  uinual   liabUiljr  ad- 

Surcoai, looi. 

Vadium,  33. 

mitted.  1485. 

Suter.  96s,  1104. 

VaStUus,  293.  S61.  121S. 

Replevin,  603.  939,  ijfi?. 

Vintlla,  1274. 

Re$pi(e  of  action  lor  atxence 
A'ttaldiu,  1094. 

Tanur,  609. 

View  of   land,  »,   41,    319, 

Taunton,     coroners     do    not 

394f.    394A,    394?.     4K>>'. 
651,  7"4.  "3»".  'SO*.  '390. 

enter  hundred  of.  IC76. 

Ai/lelo.  329. 

TV/n-,  &,  755,  1151. 

1468. 

Right,   writ  of,  p.    Ixvii    41, 

Ttlitr.  604. 

Vilalar,  99a 

loifl,  394?.  395.  507.  509. 

Templara.    The  King's  Char- 

Villein, p.  lix. 

S'O.   S3J.  5J4,  549.    553. 
S64,  596,  6S8.  1378.  1376. 

ter.  44J- 

fugitive.  729- 

of  Redcliff.  798. 

—  pnvileEM,  P-  >■■■ 

Ral-a  de  ruieU,  1001. 

Testimony,  DiIbc,  8. 

Vill-iickne»s,    14,    501,    528, 

Rol.1>cry.  199,  aaj,  isz,  358. 

Theft,    128,   129.    140.    14'. 

529,  616. 

1176,1177. 

142,    t6i,    173,    174,    176, 

VinitariHs,  569. 

^^^       Robe,  loot. 

180,   1S3,    :87,    19s,    joo, 

aOI.    JI4,    JI7,    119,     223, 

War,  time  of.  171. 

^^H     Saocluary.    p.    ]v.    91.    971, 

326,    2JS,    241.    242,     249, 

Wardship,  317.420*,  562,  563. 

^^m      1235, 1251, 1153. 

253,  IS4,  257.  aS9.    »67, 

566,668,1394.  1503.  I5<6. 

^V     ScapufacT,  tool. 

269,  272,  278,  7S8.    7S0, 

Warranty  of  charter,  491.  540. 

^^       S..UMli:ilH,,  ualaliuxlui,  Sol, 

788.  799.  800.  822,    830. 

611,   663.   664.   669.    6S3. 

810. 

S40,  847,  K51,  S90,    S96. 

6S4,   685,   695,   702.    703. 

Scotole,  297- 

899,    942,   944,   960,   1020. 

705.  721-3,  T40. 

Strifltr,  819. 

1045.    1049.     1125.     Iiz6. 

—  of  Und.    1285.    »394, 

^^       Scuiafie.     409,     7*6.     ijoj, 

113s,    1185,     1190,     1193. 
120J,    1208,     1327.     "230, 

"454 

^■.         IJ07- 

voucher  lo,  t,  7,  16,  2C, 

1231.  1232,  1239.  1264. 

21.485,486,  49^1.  509.  S'O. 

^H          1434- 

Thieves,  etc..  consorting  with. 

IS:  LI:  a  III:  IS: 

^^m     SmeicAel,  h.  7JS. 

(23,  ifii,  193.  785. 

^H     Serjeanlici,   767.   ^1.    'O&S, 

harbouring,    124,     125. 

737.      1270.     1273,     1277, 

^B         IU7. 

126.    127.    :30,    146,    16.. 

1288.    1303,     1318.     1333, 

^^H      Serjeant  of  hundred,  164. 

165,    168,    173.     184.    19S. 

"343.  USS.  1388.  '390. 

^^H      Service,  villein,  630,  707. 

234,   236.   239,    245,   aM, 

Waste.  420/ 

^^M     rural,    6»,    717.    7«6, 

79",  9*3.  956.  i"3.  "33. 

action    of,    420^    668. 

■  3SI- 

1160. 

686. 

SheriffiiofSoBienet,  App  C. 

Time,  mention  of,  587. 

W»tc(    course,    diversion    of. 

clerk.  745. 

Tiia,  810. 

33<>  339.  595.  6i6v  14S2. 

Shop,  401. 
Solda,  151Z. 

Tinclor,  569,  806. 

UiS. 

7i.i/or,  795.  841,  1151. 

Soliuf^  4S>- 

Tolls,  action  for  Uktng  unUw- 

Stabulum,  66S. 

ful.  IJ66,  1293. 

Stolen  goods  found,  943. 

Toiim.  sherifTi,  \\  mii. 

horaa  abandoned,  178. 

Tower  of  London.  ConstaUe 

^^H      Suiride.  753.  805.  i'H3-  <'35- 

of  the,  1376- 

^K    S<ut,p.  x>«i. 

p.            ^^■^rifl^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H 

464 


INDEX  OF  MATTERS. 


Wells,  liberty  of  the  dean  of, 

845. 
IVica  or  Hyka^  207. 

IVuariuSf  207. 

Women,  p.  xxii. 


Wounding,  783. 
Writ  : — 

quo  jure,  671. 

iU  precipe t  698-701 . 

de  libertate  etp-obanda,  729. 


pom^  730. 

quod  capiat  homagium,  733. 

Year  and  a  day,  the  King's, 
981,  1190,  1288. 


INDEX    OF    PERSONS    AND    PLACES. 


The  numbers  refer  to  the  entries  except  when  preceded  by  the  letter  "/." 

Places^  unless  otherwise  described^  arc  assumed  to  be  in  the  county  of  Somerset, 
Original  forms  of  spelling  are  given  in  brackets. 


A. 

Abauk,  William,  587. 
Abbot's  Camel.     See  Camel, 

West. 
Abbot's  Leigh,  962. 
Abdick   (Abbedic,    Abedike), 

304,1176. 

hundred   of,  171a,  385, 

1 188,  pp.  45,310. 

Acast',  Roger  de,  394^. 
Acford.    See  Shilling  Okeford. 
Achecote.     See  Edgcott. 
Adam,   Alice,    late    wife    of, 

364- 

Henry,  son  of,  434. 

Odiema,  late  wife  of,  92. 

Robert,  son  of,  715. 

Emelota,      his 

daughter,  715. 

William,  son  of,  14,  425, 


I37S»  1386. 
Isabella,  wife  of, 

1388.    1390,     1409,     1447, 

1451. 
the  younger,  1390, 

1409,  1410. 
Adelemundesworthy.    See 

Almsworthy. 
Adelleline,  William,  1038. 
Adthelingenye.       See    Athel- 

ney. 
Aeston.     See  Aston. 
Agelineston.      See   Easton  in 

Gordano. 


Aghambo,   Clement    de,  and 

Joan,  his  wife,  1464. 
Agnes,    Christiana,    daughter 

of,  148. 
Aguilun,    Aguillon,    Agullon, 

Ag>'llun,   William   de,   and 

Isat)ella,    his    wife,     1377, 

1379,  1383,  1384,  1404. 
Ailaid,  Roger,  382  (5^). 

Aile.     Ste  Ayle. 

Aiscumb,  Idonea,  late  wife  of 

Alexander  de,  376. 

Richard  de,  376. 

Aiston.     See  Aston. 
Ake.     See  Oake. 
Akemian,  Adam,  1496. 

Roger,  114. 

Alan,  Edith,  daughter  of,  954. 

John,  son  of,  367. 

Matilda,  -.vife  of  William, 

son  of,  1359,  1364. 

Master,    ofticial   of    ihc 


Bishop  of  Bath,  84,  89,  93. 
Alardeston,     Alarston.        See 

Atherslone. 
Alayn,  Aleyn,  Alleyn,  John, 

303. 

Matilda,    late    wife    of 

William,  1369. 

Robert,    of   Beminstre, 


526,  550. 

Walter,  1369. 


Albe,    Margery,    late  wife   of 

Ranulf  le,  1261. 
Ralph  le,  304,  148 1. 


Albemarle,  Albemare,   Aube 

mare,    Aumarle,    Reginald 

de,  48,  978,  1038,1149. 
Albiniaco,  Albyniaco,   Philip 

de,  382(<r). 

Ralph  de,  1228. 

William  de,  of  Ivelcestre, 

632. 
Albiton.  William  dc,  42a'. 
Allx)  Monasterio,  Geoffry  de, 

231.  233,  237,  363. 

Stephen  de,  472. 

Albre,  John,  1196. 
Aldeham,  Aldcnham,  Robert 

de,  102. 

Saher  de,  362. 

Aldewj'k,     Robert    de,    550, 

608. 
Aldwell,  455. 
Aldwick,   in   Blagdon   (Aide- 

wykc),  550. 
Aleavin,  William,  229. 
Alice,    his    wife, 

229. 
Alepi'.     See  Athelney. 
Akin,  Aleyn.     See  Alayn. 
Alenny.     See  Athelney. 
Al fox  ton,  in  Stringston  (Al^. 

ton),  1 146. 
Alfred,  Richard,  1287. 
Alice,   William,  son  of,  466, 

490. 
Alingenye.     See  Athelney. 
Aliz,  Roger,  382(4^). 
Alkescye,  487,  627. 

30 


46C> 


ItJIlEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Alkwy,  AlkcKyc,  Jordan  de, 

487.  sw,  62J. 
Allam  (Alom),  water  or,  IC04. 
Aller  (Aure),  S93. 
Allerton  fAlieuDBrton),  406. 
AUeyn.     S^t  Atayn. 
Alnienerord,        Alumendoid, 

Hugh  de,  i*js,  1458. 

Humiihrcy  de,  1458, 

Almsford     (Almenefuid,    Al- 

mundefotd.      AlouiDesfoid), 

263.  383.  I4S8-  1476- 
Lhurch  of  SL  Andrew's 


«483- 
te  and  Kaicmore 


1.  "483. 
-  Estfeld  ii 


Henry   de,   and    Elena, 

his  wile,  713,  ;z6. 
Joan,  wife  of  Henry  de, 

436. 

Jotdan  dc,  59», 

Malilda  de,  S46. 

Roeer  del,  591. 

Walter  de,  gjo. 

Altio,  Alono,  Auno,   Anhno, 

Alexander  de,  61. 

Geoffiy  de,  350. 

Godfrey  de,    370,    678, 

695,  936,  1172,  1506. 
'  iindreda  de,  350. 


-Hei 


s  de,  62. 


Alny,  Richard,  666. 
Alom.     Sa  Allam. 
Alia.  Aire.     Sit  Aure. 
Alscumb,  Alexander  dc,  524. 
Alsewili,  Jordan  de,  1091. 
Alumenefotd.      Set    Almene- 

ford. 
Alunold,  AdEm,  1038. 
AlTcredc,  WiUiim,  Si 4. 
Alveringlon.  Richard  de,  853. 
Alverinlon.    .S(>-Cha|)el  Atler- 

AlvesloB  (Aleveslon,  Aluelhes- 

(on),  CO.  Glouc,  565. 
Alvington  (Aluiingion),  mtnot 


Alwaid,  John.  604. 

Roberl,  604. 

Aiwio,    Aylewin,     Owen    or 
Oswyn.  3,  1079.  loSo. 

Robert,  ion  of,  318. 

Alwintoa,    Wiltia,tii    de,    381 


Andrew,  Adam,  son  o^  3c 
Geoffry,    son    of,    I  loo, 

1 1 63. 

Koger,  830. 

Angclinua,  Agaiha,  late  wife 

of,  i3,  40. 
Ani>er,  NichotaE   112S. 
Angen,  Ralph  de,  468. 

Robctl  dc,  52a 

Annoecman,    Alice,   daughicr 

□f  RqIicti.  860. 
Aiinorc,  John.  1483. 
Appedhutl(in  Marston  Bigol), 

394(*)- 
Appelliy,    Richard    de,    301, 

383. 
Richard  de  and  Denisc, 

his  wife,  3n9. 
Appsc,  Henry  de,  1180. 

Apse  (Lapse),  619,  tl8;. 

hospiialleiw  of,  1 184. 

Aqua,  Robert  de.  1139. 

■ William  de,  573. 

At,  Ruben  de,  234. 
Ar.     Sie  Ottre. 
Archer,  Henry  le,  334. 
- — -  Richard  the,  382(3.r). 
Arden.  Ardem,  Lucy  de,  ' 

Philip  de,  731,735. 

Aides,  Aidis,  William  de  and 

RoesiB,  his  wife,  525,  526, 

558- 
Arnald,  John,  son  of,  382(4/). 
Arthur,  Richard,  son  of,  3S2 

(2rf). 

Arthur,  ArLur,  Henry,  of  Mel- 

lebum,  584. 
Richard,  158. 

Rohert,  303. 

o!  bysburlhi,  526, 

Roger,  604. 

—  William,  son  of,  194<0. 


Arundel,   John    er  John  de, 

395.  5SS.  "ID. 

Nicholas  de,  Il4i  'I* 

R<^er  de,  395. 

Ascume.    Sit  Ashcomlie. 

Asewy.     See  Aswy. 

Ash,  in  Msrtock  (A-'se,  K^se), 

z66,  367.  383.  1067,  1501, 

1S''3.  1504- 
Ash,  near  Taunton  (Esse),  S6, 

loi. 
Ashcombe  (Ascumel,  56S. 
Ashcott  (Ayschecolc,  Askole], 

73°.  S84. 
Ashin,  117S. 

Ashington  (Eslington),  278. 
Ashwny  (Asweye,   Hasweye). 

1446. 
Ashwick    (Aswike,    Eswike], 

248,  j83.  15"- 
Ashwy.     Set  Aswy. 
Axkot?.    See  AshcotL 
Anugge,  Peter  dc,  1302. 
Atscbe,  Ass',  Aysse,  Adam  dc, 

Juliana,  daughler  i " 


-  Peler  de, 


[097. 


Richard  del,  1042. 

—  William  de,  104^. 

Set  also  Eae. 

i\s!e.     See  Ash. 

Asshull,  Alexander  de,  ti8?. 

Richard,  hil  * 

Astingtoa,  Stephen  de,  869. 

Aston.  Acstan,  Alston,  Attiui, 
Aysion,  Eston.  E«una, 
Adam  de,  200.  422,  495, 
550,  SS3,  608.  627,  812. 

- —  Alexander  de,  964. 

Alfred  de,  806. 

—  Gcoilry  de,  394(/). 
John,  son  of  Walter  dev 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


467 


Aston,  etc.,  William  de, 
Juliana,  wife  of,  57,  58. 

Aston  (Aeston),  505,  608,  615. 
See  also  Long  Ashton. 

Asweye.    See  Ashway. 

Aswike.     Su  Ashwick. 

Aswy,  Ashwy,  de  Assewy, 
Thomas,  566,    1339,   1 341, 

^  1346,  1353- 

Atelonesande and  Ralph, 

his  brother,  114. 
Atbalse,  Attehalse,  Sampson, 

1423,  1427. 

.S;^^  also  Halse. 
Athelney      (Alenny,    Alegn*, 

Alingenye,   Athinlegh,  Ad- 

thelingenye),  Robert,  abbot 

of.  437.  1348,  1354.  1 381. 

1454,  1488. 

abbot  of,  164,  p.  XXV. 

Atherstone,  in  WTiite  Lacking- 
ton  (Alardeston,  Alarston), 

380. 
Atrio,  Richard  de,  70. 
Attasle,   Roger  and   Hawise, 

his  wife,  1368. 
Attebere.  Christina,  late  wife 

of  Nicholas  de,  1304,  1322. 

Su  also  Bere. 
Attegrave,  Robert,  475. 
Attehalse.     See  AthaJse. 
Attehildeweye,  William,  1239. 
Attenorchard,  Luke,  1475. 
Attewode,  Alina,  late  wife  of 

Robert,  724. 

Thomas,  565. 

Attcworih,  Philip  de,  357. 
Aubemare.     See  Albemarle. 
Aucleye,  1499. 
Audeli,  John  dc,  299. 
Audres,  William  dc,  169. 
Angevin,  William,  420m. 
Aula,  John  de,  732. 
Richard  de,   of   Brene, 

851. 
-^  John  and  WilliaTn, 

his  sons,  ib, 

Robert  de,  940,  p.  xxx. 

John,   his  brother, 

940. 
Aulclop,  Richard,  382(5^^'). 
Aumarlc.     See  All>cmarlc. 
Aumcre,  William  tic,  382  (27'). 
Aomney,  Jordan  del,  382(2^)- 


Aumney,  Roger  del,  382  (2r). 
Aunestowe,  Agnes  de,  1280. 
Walter,  her  brother, 

ib, 
Aungerin',  Walter,  202. 
Aungers,    Andrew    de,    995, 

996. 
Aunho.     See  Alno. 
Aura,    Aure,     Aire,     Auure, 

Gerard  de,  382(/). 
John  de,    i36(/>),    394^, 

394A  394/>.  425.  597,  I433. 
1521. 

Agnes,    wife    of. 


See 


394^.  394/".  463. 
Ralph  de,  14,  382(/). 

Richard  de,  1309. 

Aure.     See  Aller. 

Ausnay.     See  Alneto. 

Auston,  Stephen  de,  672. 

Auure.    See  Aure. 

Avaines,  Richard  de,  8. 

Avalon,  isle  of,  p.    134. 

also  Glastonbury. 
Avalon,  Robert,  1147. 
Avenal,  Avenel,  Oliver,  214. 
Avenaunt,  Thomas,  1147. 

Nicholas,  280,  420,  668. 

Roland,  280. 

Roland  and  Randal, 

his  sons,  280. 

William,  49,  738. 

Emma,  his  wife,  49. 

Avice,  Roger,  son  of,  400. 
Avnho,  Aunho.     See  Alno. 
Avon  river,  the,  802. 
Axbridgc    (Axebridgc),     477, 

522,  70s,  1303- 

burgh  of,  304,  p.  237. 

Axe,  Adam  de,  385. 

water  of  the.  818. 

Axebrig,  Henr>',  son  of  David 

of,  477. 
Ayle  (Aile).  100. 
Ay  lew  in.     See  Alwin. 
Aylmer,  Gill^ert,   1446. 

Robert,  1 191. 

Aylwin.     See  Alvrin. 
Aynebaud,  Philip  de,  1269. 
Ayschecote.     See  Ashcott. 
Ayscote,  William  de,  1 04 1. 
Ayssc.     .SV^"  Assche. 
Aysslford,  (icr\'ase  de,  1 296. 
Aystun.     See  Aston, 


Aywood,  Adam  de,  729. 

—  Matilda,  his  mother, 


ib. 


mother,  ib. 


Aubrey,  his  grand 


uncle,  ib. 


Alexander,       his 


ib. 


Richard,  his  cousin, 


B. 


Babcary  (Babbekari),  1040. 
Babington  (Bobinton,  Babin- 

ton),  368,  441,  509. 

Eva  de,  91. 

Ralph,  her  son,  91. 

Bacheler,    Thomas,    of  Ivel- 

cestre,  567. 
Backwell  (Bacwell,  Bakwell), 

42CV/,  935,  1 513. 
Bacun,     Bakun,    John,    429, 

669,  1038. 

Robert,  IS9,  383- 

Bacwell,  Elena  de  and  Alice, 

her  sister,  15 13. 

William,  son  of  Thomas 


de,  154. 


154 


Roger,  his  brother, 


Badecumbe.     S.-e  Batcombe. 
Badehull,  Walter  de,  452. 
Badgworth        (Ba^gesworthe, 

Bagewurth),       792,     1283, 

1514. 

Great,  1 102. 

Badialton.     See  Bathealton. 
Badialton,  Baialton,  Agnes  de, 

483. 
Reginald  de,  383. 

Bagborough  ( Baggcbergh), 
Little,  iioi,  p.  xxx. 

West,  1 102. 

Bagdripp,  Bagedripe,  Bagge- 
dreppe,  Baketrepe,  Bage- 
trop,  Bagetripe,  Bagge- 
trippe,  Alan  de,  1119. 

Nicholas,  son  of  Aunger 

de,  1 1 19. 

Robert    de,    422,    423, 


425,   569,    587,  654,  6s5 
1 1 15,  1 1 19. 
—  Simon  de,  1 1 1 5. 


468 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Ilamlr  pp,  Sybil,  wife  of  Robert 

de,  557,  569,  654,  1378. 

William  de,  306,  383. 

Bagewurth,  liaggeworthe.   Sec  , 

BadgA\'orth. 
Bagga,  William,  209. 

GeotTry,  his  man,  209. 

Baggetrippe.      Sec     Bawdrip 

rt  W  Hagdripp. 
Bagworthe,    Richard    de,    of 

(iascony,  363(^). 
Baialton.     .SV**"  Badialton. 
Baiocis,  Alan  de,  382(4*1). 
Joice  de,  286,   382(4«), 

422,  425,  587. 
Bakelr*,    William    de,     304, 

381. 
Bakepeth,  Matthew  de,  42a'. 

Baker,  Ralph  the,  1151. 

Richard  the,  114,569. 

Robert  the,  1207. 

Simon  the,  382^/),  760, 

1355. 

Walter  the,  and   Alice, 


his  wife,  564. 
—  William  the,  1 1 50. 
Wyot  the,  569. 


Baketrepe.     .SVt-  Hagdripp. 
Bakun.     .SVv  liacon. 
Bakwell.     See  Backwell. 
Bal,  William,  773. 
Balch,  K  Iward,  386. 
Balde,   Henry,  of  Cusington, 

889. 
Baldwin,  Baldwin,  son  of,  38. 

Gill^rt,  son  of,  32,  50. 

Richard,      of     Stapell, 

1090. 

Rol^ert,  604. 

Bali,  Adam,  of  Kxeter,  1 1 75, 

1 1 76. 
Balistarius,  Nicholas,  394(»'). 
Balle,  John,  959. 
Mabel,     daughter      of 

Adam,  530,  1273. 
Rc^er  le,  187. 


Bailer,  Ai!am  le,  of  Burton, 

966. 
Balun,  Ballun,  John  de,  1258, 

1452,  1453- 
Banewell,  Fhomas  de,  350. 

Banwell,  152,  304. 

hundred  of,  385,  p.  27. 

-« Luncsthef  in,  774. 


Barat,  Baret,  Adam,  of  Cusin-  ' 
ton,  1 1 19.  i 

Reginald,  604. 

Robert,  123JJ. 

Robert,     of     Asperton, 

940. 


William,  159,  901,  939. 

bailiflf    of   Camel 

Hundred,  473. 

of    Southampton, 


1292. 

Barat[o]r,  Godfrey  le,  953. 
Barbarel,  William,  382.2/). 
Bardolf,  Robert,  11 02. 
Bare,  Barr,  Luke  de  la,  394 

Baret.     See  Barat. 
Bare\nll,  Robert  de,  1463. 
Barewe.     See  Barrow. 
Barewe,        Berwe,       Barwe, 

Berewe,  Hugh  de  la,  304. 

John  de  la,  1023,  1477. 

Robert  de,  382(<7). 

William  de,  379. 

Barewurthe,  Walter,  857. 
Uaril,  Uaryl,  Philip,  1 112. 

—  Roger,  164,  1 1 12. 
Barinton,    Geoffry    de,    364, 

3^3*  593- 
John,  his  son,  593. 

Barinton,  Osbert  de,  1477. 

Barkenoles,  Roger  de,  655. 

Harlynch   (Berlyz),   prior    of, 

485. 
Hame,  Henry  de,  784. 
Bameflet,     Nicholas    de,    p. 

426. 
Harnevill,   Bemeville,   Bume- 

ville,  Michael  de,  1527. 

Richard  de,  259. 

Robert,     382(50,     566, 

1455,  1487. 

William  de,  420//. 

Harr.     Sec  Bare. 
Harrington  (Barinton),  95. 
Barrow  (barewe),  255. 
harrow,  Norlh,  1049. 
Barry,   Barri,  Luke  de,    1 15, 

289. 

Payn  de,  382(5;*). 

William  de,  382(3/),  547, 

631,  1187. 
Barton    St.    David    (Berton), 

257,  384*  408,  1046,  1049- 


Barun,  Robert  le,  of  La  Penne, 

971- 
Barwe.     See  Barewe. 

Baryl.     See  Baril. 

Baset.     .SVc-  Basset. 

Basinges,  Ralph  ce,  560. 

l!askel      maker      (Corbi/ier)^ 

Robert  the,  189,  p.  Iv. 
Basset,  Baset,  Alan,  317,  383. 

David,  382(^),  936. 

Gilbert,  317. 

• John,  82. 

Philip.  1137. 

Roger,  1456. 

Bast,  Randal,  383,  385. 
Bastard,  Geoflfry  le,  493. 

Henry,  889. 

Nicholas,  908. 

Robert  le,  376. 

Willam  le,  5,  908. 

Alice,  wife  of,  5. 

Bat,  Bate,  Batte,  John,  479. 

Robert,  1506. 

Thomas,  691. 

Batcombe  (Badecumbc,  Bate- 

cumb),  249,  361,  383,  953, 

1018. 
Balecok,  Ralph,  1 482. 
Batecumbe,  Richard  de,  361, 

383. 
Bath.    105,    211,    298,    304, 

1512. 

citizens  of,  p.  134. 

church  of,  p.  134- 

city  of,  385. 

hundred  of,  pp.  36,  227, 

228. 
Bath,  Bathe,  Bathon*,  Henry 

de,  1260,    1323,    pp.    118, 

352. 
John  de,  1029. 

Peter  de,  304. 

Walter  de,  394//,  7SO- 

Bath,  bishop  of.   42Qst,  487, 

785,786,817,818. 
bailifl^     of,     I49» 

152. 
official    o£      S§i 

Alan. 

J.,  bishop  d,  29a,  755, 


1046. 

—  prior  of,  383,  462,  50t| 
744.  749,  841,  1392,  t^ 
I5"2, 


f 


^^H         Uath,  Nicholas, itrch.  of,  1397, 

Bere.     Set    Beie    R^    and 

^^H           1300,    1307.    1314,   1315, 

in,  804. 

Beer. 

^^H         Robert,    parson    of   Si. 

Bednesun.     Ste  BempstoDt. 

Bere,  Bety,  co.  Devon,  713, 

Bedoeslan,  John  de,  858. 

Bere,  Baldwin  dc  la,  543. 

^^^1             James'  in,  1349. 

Beelde.     Sft  Bd.le. 

Bencdiclde,  510. 

^^H         ——  Rogrr,  bishop  of,  1198. 

Beer  (Bere),  Ralph,  reeve  of. 

Cecily,  laie  wife  of  Bene- 

^^M          1399,   1301.    1303,    130S. 

93,  101. 

dict  de,  1462. 

^H         1310. 1337.  nifi,  I33I- 

Beer,   in   High  liam   (Bcrc), 

Chrisiiana  de  U,    1351, 

^^m         Savaric,  bishop  of,  395. 

io6o. 

1443- 

^^B          Thomas,   prior  of,  300, 

Beg.  Beghe,  Benedict,  908. 

John  and  Nichohu, 

^H          301,308.310. 

Hugh,  1159. 

her  400s,  1443. 

Bath   and   Glaslon,  JosceliD, 

Bcgwin,  Thomoa.  of  Cidicole, 

Eraald  de,  93.  loi- 

bishop  of,  pp.  133,  134. 

387. 

Iseult  de,  and  Peler.  her 

Behangre.     Se/r  Binegar. 

husband,  543. 

IJ07. 

Biiihf<»d(Foiria).  748. 

Beinin,        Beynin,         Bdniy, 

t-eccr    de,    394(f).    Sto. 

Bathpool.  near  Taunlon  (B«t- 
pole),  1378- 

Nicholas,  and  Dyonisia,  his 

6S7,  715.  733' 

wife,  658. 

Richard  de  la.  679. 

Batild,   Botild,    Richuii,  son 

-Thomas,  JSi. 

Richard  le,  1279. 

of.  86.  loi. 

Waller,  940. 

Alice,  his  mother, 

Baipole.     Set  Bathpool. 

- —  William,  7. 

1379. 

Baltc    Sit  Bat. 

Bekel.  Elias.  387. 

Robert  de.  and  Avice,  hit 

Balur.    Robert    le,   of   Bate- 

Richard.  383i3rf). 

wife,  s6a. 

cnmb,  349,  383. 

Bekinlon.     Set  Beckinglon. 

-~ Richard,  their  son. 

^^^           Bauderun,  Kogei,  611. 

Bekkcsghflic,  Adam  de.  559- 

564- 

^^^L          Biulon.  Eustace  de,  569. 

Bel.    Beo,   Beu,    Richard   le. 

Roger  le,  304. 

^^^1         BauDlon,  co.  Devon,  1143. 

3»Mii]. 

Walter  de  la,  404. 

^^1        Bknpel.    i'MBeaupet. 
^^f         Baret.  Roger  de.^. 

Bawdrip  (Baggetrippc),  Adam 
theililhinettianof,  itz6, 

Robert  le,  47',  SIS- 

^  William  de,  394*.  394(A 

William  le,  746. 

1309. 

Bel  ami.  Adam,  953. 

,to  a/io  Attebere. 

Bclde,    Uedde.     Elias,    414. 

Bere     [Regb],     CO.     Donet, 

Bayeux  (de  BaiocU),  John  dc. 

1351. 

1394- 

pp.  "33.  135- 

Beleston,  William  de,  1519. 

fiereford.  1449. 

k                      BeSle,  WiUiin  ihe,  4Ji. 

Bclfrerc,  Richard,  6o«. 

Nicholas  de,  and  Lettice, 

^^B            Besnlon,  Roger  de,  i  Joa. 

Btllebir,      William,    son    of 

his  vrife,  1449. 

^^H          BcauJiz.  Richaid,  ijoj. 

Adam  de,  1086. 

— -  Richard  de,  1449. 

^^^H         Thcmai,  l$2^ 

Bullvc,  William,  of  Cusmgton, 

— ^RichMd,his«on,«i. 

^^^M        Bctueiani,  Thomiis,  857. 

8S9. 

Ri-igw.      V„  n.„o.e. 

^^H          UeauUcu    (Bcllo    Luco).     co. 

Helln     r V   • - 

„._.,..._        Brcga,    ^^m 

^^H              (l.-inl!>,  ablmt  of,  410^. 

■     ■■'■-.cy^^^^ 

^^H          Bcaui«l,     Bnxiiel,     Richard, 

■i.mO').    ^^^^H 

^B      374- 

"45" 

^^^^^H 

^^H           Roger.  1091,  p.  425. 

Bem.i,.!'             ..  ■ ■ 

Bcchinion,  KMas  de,  39. 

-— Wdio^lgMMI 

lw|y/!Mtci  dL  l.,'';zo6.  '  St^^^^^^M 

Beckingion  (Bekinton),  214. 

Bedel.  Richud  Ic,   of  Cndin- 

^^^^■hlklBi  finkeli^^^^^H 

^_                     ton,  451. 

^^_           WillUm    le,    of  Cnxl 

^^L               M>1rt,  1326. 

iW^pT^i^^H 

^^M        Bedroi^.3i7.P-n. 
^^^H         Bedminsl«r  (Beminti«i,   Ber- 

Beneyi,   JaB%JO^^^^H 

her  wn;  IcB^^^^I 

^^H            mJrtttre],    175.    304,    .383, 

Beiuc,  (ab^^^^^H 

^^H            jie,  ;sa.go9,  H14. 

Vcw    -SttS^^^^I 

^^H         hundred  of,  pp.  39,  141. 

Herd,  waibaf^^^H 

^1 

470 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Berkhampstead,  honor  of,  p. 

135. 
castle  of,  lb, 

Berminstre.     See  Bedminster. 

Bermondsey  (Bennundes*),  pp. 

129,  360. 
prior   of,  382(3«/),  617, 

708,  870,  1050,  1278. 
Bernard,   Ralph,  son  of,   14, 

16,  19-21,  392flr,  393,  421, 

423.    510.    544,   580,  932, 

990,  1082,  II4S. 
William,  attorney 

of,  16,  19-21. 

Richard,  806. 

son  of,  735. 


Robert,  987. 

son  of,  615. 

Bemardeswrth,  1320. 

Bemestan.     See  Bempstone. 

Bemeville.    See  Bamevill. 

Beroches,  Thomas  de,  28. 

Eva,  wife  of,  28I 

Henry,  father 

of,  28. 

Berreyt,  Richard,  1337. 

Berrow  (Berghes,  Benves), 
424,  1466. 

Berton.    See  Barton  St.  David. 

Berton,  Avice,  late  wife  of 
Robert  de,  1507. 

Robert,  his  brother, 

ib, 

Michael  de,  394(0,  S^S* 

Robert  de,  736. 

Thomas  de,  451,  501. 

Berwe.     See  Barewe. 

Berwes.     See  Berrow. 

Best,  WiUiam,  58. 

Bethwille,  Drogo  de,  382(2^). 

Beu.     See  Bel. 

Bevene,  Amabel  de,  545. 

Beverley  (Beverlac),  co.  York, 
provost  of,  p.  126. 

B^min.     See  Beinin. 

Biagraing,  Richard,  382(3^). 

Biaude,  John,  1287. 

Bichenstok,  John,  son  of  Edith 
de,  1004. 

Bickenhall  (Bikenhal',  Bike- 
hull,  Bykehull,  Bygchauble), 
6,  527,  1188,  1274,  1275, 
1281. 

Picton,  1355. 


Biddesham  (Bydesham),  589, 

735. 
Bifeld,  Alan  de,  loi^. 

Bigehem,  Adam,  962. 

Bigesand,  Henry  de,  394(»). 

Bigge,    Simon,     of    Stapeir, 

1079,  1080,  1090. 

Bighorn,  Eva,  1484. 

Bigod,  Bigot,  Bygod,  Henry 

le,  1433. 

Hugh  le,  1433. 

Richard  le,  394(>^),  443, 

531,669,  1394. 
Bigot.     See  Bigod. 
Bikebir*,  William  de,  1096. 
Bikehall,     Bykehull,     Edith, 

late    wife    of   Gervase    de, 

1281. 
Bikehull.     See  Bickenhall. 
Owain  and  Richard, 

sons  of,  192. 
Walter  de,  70. 


Bikelegh,      Bikeley,      Bykel, 
Bykeslegh,      Huvard      de, 

3843^).  507. 
William  de,   507,    510, 

1338. 
Joan,  wife  of,  426. 

Bikenhal.     .S*^^  Bickenhall. 

Bikesande,  289. 

Bikewik,  Jordan  de,  53. 

Bile,  Henry,  of  Chadelinche, 

974. 
Bilhok,   Billok,  Simon,  660, 

929. 
Billington,  1222. 
Binde  Devel,  Robert,  1 186. 
Binegar    (Behangre,     Behen- 

hanger,     Benangre),     824, 

pp.  400,  426. 
Bineham,  Geoffry,  382(3^;'). 
Birkele.     See  Berkeley. 
Bishopworth,    in    Bedminster 

(Bisscopewurth),  813. 
Bisscopewurth.      See    Bishop- 
worth. 
Bisshopston,    in      Montacute 

(Bissopeston),  ^10. 
Bissop, ,  756. 


Mabel  la,  800. 


Bissopeston.    See  Bisshopston. 

Nicholas  de,  and  Alice, 

his  wife,  405. 
Bilhcwayc,  Kicliard,  1005. 


Bithewode,  Robert,  1077,   p. 

xxxi. 
Black,    Blake,   Adam,  of  la 

Strete,  iQ2a 

Alice,  124. 

Geoffry,  of  Kori  Malet, 

1 1 89. 
John,  of  la    Radeclive, 

784. 

Roger  le,    of  Woletoo, 


241,  383- 
Walter,  260,  383. 

Blagdon     (Blakedone),     131, 

383. 
Blake.     See  Black. 

Blakedon,  John  de,  1090. 

Blakedone.     See  Blagdon. 

Blakeford,     Blakford,    John, 

Serjeant  of,  852. 
Robert  de,  379,  394(^). 

394(/),  468,  511,  533,  587, 

650. 

Roger  de,  1206. 

William  de,  1 251. 


Blakeman,  Henry,  806. 
Blakemor,  Robert  de,  1237. 
Blakeswurde,  Avice  de,  72. 
Blaminstre,      Biancmoster, 

Richard  de,  1189,  1296. 
Blateme,   Jordan    de,   of  La 

Pile,  1 189. 
Blayf,  Stephen  le,  382(4tr). 
Bleadney,  in  Wookey  (Blede- 

ncye),  572. 
Bleadon      (Bledon,    Blednn), 

590,  778. 

manor  of,  p.  235. 

Blebir*,  Emma  ae,  447. 

Roger  de,  447. 

Bledenay,  Adam  de,  572. 
Bledeneye.     See  Bleadney. 
Bledon.     Su  Bleadon. 

Stephen  de,  522. 

Plendun,  Adam  de,  382(4/^. 
Blokesworth,     Blokkesworth, 

Henry,    son     of     Robert, 

1283. 
Isolt,  late  wife  of  Robert 

de,  1283,  1295. 

Robert  de,  705,  711. 

Roger  de,  1477- 


Bloy,  Walter  le,  1 1 13. 
Bloyo,     Bloyou,     Ralph    de, 
334,  383. 


Index  of  persons  and  places. 


47 1 


Bloyo,  Isabella,  his  wife,  334. 
Blun,  Bum,  William  le,  702, 

704. 
Blund   {B/undus),   Adam    of 

Pytton,  578. 

Elyas,  472. 

Geofl&y,  304. 

Henry,  540,  664. 

Joan,    wife   of    Adam, 

438. 

Joan,   wife  of  Hamelin, 


76/ 


John  le,  I444f  1490. 

—  Luke  le,  1508. 

—  Maurice  le,  794. 

—  Peter,  382(r). 

—  Ralph,  163,  169. 

—  Richard  le,  1355. 

—  Robert,     of     Draicote, 

383. 

—  Rol)ert    le,     845.    908, 

"433. 
and     Matilda,     his 

wife,  361. 

—  Ro^er,  son  oi  Eva,  935. 
Walter,   383,  604,  8o5, 


946. 

William,  572,  880,  944, 


1066. 
Blundel,  William,  of  Kinges- 

ton,  962. 
Blundus.     S^e  Blund. 
Bluntville,  Mary,  late  wife  of 

Thomas,  1271. 
Bobinton.     See  Babington. 
Bochard,  Hugh,  1189. 
Bocher,  William  le,  840. 
Boclande.     See  Buckland  and 

Minchin  Buckland. 
Boclande,  Bokelond,  Herbert 

dc,  382(y). 

Maurice  de,  394(/). 

Bocles,  Roger  de,  1000. 
Bodeville,  Budeville,  Margery, 

late    wife  of   William    de, 

420/;  686, 1 27 1,  1288,  1305. 

See  also  Flury,  Margery  de. 

Richard  de,  1288. 

William  de,  679. 

Bodrigan,  Henry  de,  p.  425. 
Bohun,  Boun,  Franco  de,  and 

Sybil,  his  wife,  1394. 
Humphrey       de       and 

Alienora,  his  wife,  1394. 


Bohun,  Lucy  de,  542. 
Boimul'n,  262. 
Bok,  Robert  le,  925. 
Boleville,  John  de,  552. 

Nicholas  de,  779. 

William  de,  1463. 

and  Ela,  his  wife, 

1351- 
Bolon,  Boloyne,  BoUonne,  de 

Bolonia,  de  Bononia,  Fare- 

mus  or  Pharamond,  394(/}, 

424,  510,  585,  1068. 

Richard  de,  1501. 

Bondedut,  Robert,  245. 
Bonegent,  Richard,  569. 
Boneham,  Waukel  de,  963. 
Bonet,  Isabella,  59. 

Robert,  59. 

Bonevile,      Boneville,     Bona 

Villa,  Joan,  wife  of  William, 

439. 

John  de,  424,  510,  585, 


606,  627,  895,  929. 
—  Stephen  de,  439. 
Thomas  de,  1 15. 


Bonevil I,  William  de,  576,  599, 

722,  1328,  1477. 
and  Alice,  his  wife, 

457. 
Bonham,  Thomas  de,  1521. 

William  de,  311. 

Bononia.     See  Bolon. 

Bonswayn,  Thomas,  604. 

Bordel,   abbot    of.     See  Bor- 

dcsley. 

Richard,  1223. 

Border,  le  Burd',  Peter,  697, 

lOOI. 

Thomas,  14,  19,  22. 

Roesia,  wife  of,  14, 

19,  22. 
Bordesley  (Bordel),  co.  Wore, 

abbot  of,  307. 
Borilot,  Richard,  604. 
Borham,    Borreham,  Maurice 

de,  728,  1283. 

Thomas  de,  688. 

Boscard,  Peter,  356,  383. 
Boschct,  Gervase,  52. 
Boscher.     See  Bosher. 
B02C0,  Boscho,  Alexander  de, 

382  W. 

John  de,  1215,  1249. 

of  Haubierton,  394^/. 


Bosco,  Nicholas  de,  382(a), 
382(5jr),  579,  1463,  1465. 

and  Agnes,  his  wife, 

466,  490. 


and     Emma,      his 
wife,  663. 
—  Philip  de,  604. 

Richard   de,    114,    147, 


355.  383- 

—  Stephen,  brother  of,  147. 

—  Robert     de,    510,    564, 
585,  941,  looi,  1089,  1431, 

1432. 

of  Kadebiri,    424, 


425. 


William  de.  604,  1302. 


Bosecroft,  Mill  of,  672. 
Bosham        (Boseham),       co. 

Sussex,  1394. 
Bosher,      Boscher,     Herbert, 

303. 
Margery,  303. 

Bosington,        Richard        de, 

382(4^). 
Bosmode,  12. 

Bossington  (Bosinton),  1488. 
Bot,  Hugh,  1446. 
Boteraus.     See  Botreaus. 
Boierell,  John   de,    346,  379, 

383. 
Botild.     See  Batild. 
Botreaus,    Boteraus,     Aubrey 

de,  382(3^),  1091. 
Bojrton,  in  Gillingham  (Buri- 

ton),  CO.  Dorset,  967. 
Bovenay,   Margery,  late  wife 

of  Geoffry  de,  1387,  1408. 
Bovill,  335. 
Bower,  in  Bridgwater  (Bure), 

1124. 
Boydin,  Ricliard,  806. 
Boye,  Richard,  107a 

Robert^  1 109. 

and  Agnes,  his  wife, 

1360,  1367. 

William  de  la,  11 02. 


Boyford,  co.  Dorset,  967. 

WMliam,   the    clerk  ol^ 

968. 


Henry,  son  of  the  smith 
of,  974. 
Boyvin,  Nicholas,  of  Kattkof« 

503- 
Bcaun,  Robert,  l^P^ 


47^ 


iNDfiX   OF   PERSONS  AND  PLAC6S. 


Bracton,   Brecton,  Henry  de, 
Justice,  395,  1429,  p.  425. 

Ralph,  777. 

Bracy,  Robert,  934. 

Bradele,  Bradeleg,  Bradelegh, 
Adamde,  215. 

Richard  de,  1 00a 

Robert  de,  1446. 

Thomas  de,  1455. 

Walter    de,    parson     of 

Alemanesford,  1476,  1483. 
William  de,  1097. 


Bradenesse,  John  de,  1 425. 
Bradenstok.     See  Bradstock. 
Bradenye,  Jordan  de,  500. 
Bradestan,   Richard  de,  attor> 

ney,  4201/. 
Bradestrete,  Richard  de,  794. 
Bradeweie,    Bradewey,    John 

de,  1016. 

Walter  de,  304. 

Bradley,  prior  of,  382(34:). 
Bradstock  (Bradenstok,  Brade 

vestok),  prior  of,  869,  871, 

1387. 
Bragge,  Walter,  1 108. 

Branche,  Braunche,  William, 

394(A),    394(/),    42s,   429, 

445,    482,    569,   587,   646, 

648. 
Joan,  his  wife,  44$, 

482. 
Brane,    Alice,   wife  of  John, 

440. 
Brangling,  William.  1510. 
Bratache,      Brataske.         See 

Brctasche. 
Braunche.     See  Branche. 
Braute.     See  Breaut^. 
Bray,  William  de,  978. 

Richard  de,  1079. 

Brean  (Broen),  1497. 
Breaut^  (Braute),  378. 
Breche,  Walter  de  la,  171a, 

604. 
Robert    and   Elias,     his 

brother,  171^. 
Breche,  Walter,  son  of  Walter 

de  la,  1 186,  11S7. 

John,  his  son,  tb. 

William  le,  1491. 

Brecton.     See  Bracton. 
Breder,     Brodcr,    llcnry    le, 

1447. 


Breene,  David  de,  851. 
Breges.     See  Berges. 
Brekebare,  Walter  of  Yatton, 

762. 
Brekehere.  William,  1 14. 
Brekeleg,  Adam,  1161. 
Bremeset,  John  de,  75. 
Bremhull,  Roger  de,  182. 
Brent,  272,  304. 

East,    1319,   1332,  1333. 

hundred  of,  220,  p.  27. 

Brent,      South     (Suthbrente, 

Su])rente),  272,  1333,  1466. 
Brente,  Richard  de,  272. 

Robert  de,  530. 

Simon  de,  64. 

Brent   Marsh    (Brentemareis), 

106,  1063. 
Brenton,  Benedict  de,  1019. 
Bret,  Christiana,   late  wife  of 

Aylmer  le,  374. 

John  le,  342. 

Moses  le,  507. 

Ralph  le,  940. 

Robert,  his  son,  940. 

and  Christiana,  his 

wife,  684. 

Robert  le,  ^\2^  940. 

Stephen  le,  1063. 

William     le,     54.     343, 


382(f),   382(S«;),  421,  423, 

627,  1356. 
Bretasche,   Bretesch,   Bretesh, 
Bretache,    Bratache,   John, 

27,   U7i    383.    409,    420^. 
42?^,   768,  841,  877,   936, 

964. 

and  Angareta,  his 

wife,  1265. 

Richard,  27. 


Breton,    Bretun,    Thomas  le, 

I375»  1386,  1405. 
Walter  le,  of  Schyreburn, 

564. 
Breuton.     See  Brulon. 
Brewham     (Brjuham,    Breu- 

ham  Muccgros),  953,  956. 
Brewhousc,     Adam     of     the, 

'355- 
Bricc,  Adam,  son  of,  89a 

Bridde,  Robert  Ic,  1054. 

Bridecumbe,  154. 

Brideixjrt,   Geoffry    de.    560, 

569,  650,  717,  828,  1473. 


Brideport,  Walter  de,  569. 

Bridgwater  ( Briges,  Bruges, 
Brug  Walteri),  106,  164, 
166,   168,  413,  1074,  1 1 13, 

1 1 14,     1321,     1358,     1491. 

1500. 
burgh  of,   304,   pp.   41, 

292. 

castle  of,  163,  168. 

hospital  of,  1 1 24. 


Bridie.     See  Priddy. 
Bridport,  co.  Dorset,  p.  3. 
Brien,    Alice,    wife  of  John, 

542,  653. 
Brigeford,  manor  of,  1 143. 
Briges.     See  Bridgwater  ctnd 

Bruges. 
Brigford,  Hugh  de,  382(4^). 
BrimeshuU,  Richard  de,  92. 
Brislington  (Bristelton),  911. 
Adam,    the    forester  of. 


924. 


Gilbert,    the   tiihingman 


of,  924,  p.  XXX. 

Simon  de,  803. 


Bristelton.     See  Brislington. 
Bristol,  402,    417,   488,    596, 

^99,   795,    799.    809,  910, 
930,  p.  449. 

abbot  of  St.  Augustine's 

in,  p.  449. 

almonry  of  Billeswick  in, 


618. 

—  hospital  of   St.  John  in. 


795,  797. 
master     of,     394/, 

408. 

—  St.  Mary's  in,  1302. 

—  St.  Thomas  in,  795. 

—  Radeclive  in.     See  Red- 


cliff. 

—  St.  James  in,  /^2od, 
prior  of,  439,  457. 

—  bailiffe  of,  525. 

—  castle  of,  354. 
constable  of.  .S^^Cigogn^. 


Bristol  1,    Bristold',  Agnes  de, 

1346. 

Elias  de,  354. 

Agatha  and  Elena, 

his  daughters,  354. 

Hugh  de,  1029. 

Matthew  de,  1 261. 

Peter  de,  66,  144. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


473 


Bristol!,  Warin  de,  819. 
Britel,  Richard,  604. 
Brito,  William,  572. 
Britone,  78. 
Britton,   Britone,     Ralph  de, 

Heniy,  servant  of,  817. 
William,    son    of, 

817. 

William  de,  8. 


Briuwar.     See  Bruer. 
Briuwes.    See  Brues. 
Briw.     See  Brue. 
Briwer.     See  Bruer. 
Briwes.     See  Brues. 
Briwton.     See  Bruton. 
Briz,  William,  of  Blakeford, 

1477. 
Broc,  John  de,  167. 

Brockere.     See  Broker. 

Brockleg,    William    de,    382 

(4w). 
Broen.     See  Brean. 
Broen,  Richard,  son  of  Stephen 

of,  1497. 
Brok,   Broke,  Alfred    de  la, 

24a 

Osbert  de  la,  240. 

Waller    del,    Joel,    his 

man,  977. 
Brokebir,  Walter  de,  799. 
Broker,  Brockere,  Hugh,  248, 

384,385. 
Bromfield  manor,  1 197. 

Bromleg*,      Robert,    tithing- 

man  of,  17a 
Matilda,  his  wife, 

170. 
Bromptoo  (Bnmeton),  manor 

oi,  1164. 
Broomstieet,    near    Colbone 

(Brumstext),  496. 
BrothoD,  Ramili  de,  96$. 
Broy,  William  de,  506. 
Bruce,  Richard,  of  Cherltoo, 

995- 
Bme  (Briw),  river,  897. 

Bmen.     See  BrmL 

Bruer,     de     Bnieia,    de    la 

Broesea,   Brabeie,  Brywer, 

Joan,  984. 

John,  394/«),  74^,  P- 13- 

Jefaellns,  soo  of  Robert 

de  la,  fi2ih. 
Okbeit,  1326. 


Bruer.  Ralph,  son  of  Reginald 

de,  970. 

Roger.  13. 

William,     296,     382(a), 

382(5jr),  1456. 

the  elder,  p.  134. 


Bruem  (Bruere),  co.  Oxford, 

abbot  of.  151. 
Brues,       Bruwes,      Briuwes, 

Bryus,    Briwes,    John    de, 

382(1).  132.  p.  133. 
Robert  de.  394('')»  1274. 

1275.  p.  444. 
Brug    Walteri.      See    Bridg- 
water. 
Bruges,  Brugis,  Briges,  Alice 

de,  413. 

Hugh  de,  413,  1477. 

Thomas  de,  n. 

William  de,  1206. 

Bruges.    See  Bridgwater. 
Bnmere.    See  Bruer. 
Brumlande.     See  Bruneland. 
BrumsterL     See  Broomstreet 
Brun,  Bruen,  Adam,  186. 

Elvas  le,  809. 

John,  806,  1355. 

of  Widecumb,  1423, 

1427. 

Robert,  90. 

Roger,  1456. 

Thomas,  922. 

Walter    le,    971,    1422, 


1426. 

Brunedon,  William  de,  1 164. 
Bruneland,  Brumlande,  323. 

hundred  of,  285,  p.  27. 

manor  of,  1 165. 

Braneton.     See  Bromptoo. 
Brunig,  Walter,  of  Cusington, 

889. 

^  illiaro,  of   Cusington, 

887. 
BmtoQ    (Briwton,    Bruwetoo, 
Brutton).     135,     232,    242, 

304,334-  951,956.  145*^ 
hundreri  of,  pp.  52,  54, 

268. 

West,  242.  383. 

Bruton,  pri^^r  of,  329,  394'^), 

621,  1229.  1450. 
Brutton.     See  I^ron. 
Bmwetcfu     See  Bru;^/n, 
Bfjvham.    See  Brewbaai. 


Bryus.     See  Brues. 

Brywer.     See  Bruer. 

Bubbe,    Adam,    of    Stapell, 

1080. 

Richard,  of  Stapell,  1080. 

Bnche.  William,  569,  828. 
Buckingham,  church  of,  1 392. 

county  of,  p.  350. 

Matthew,  archdeacon  of, 

1392,  1406. 
Buckland     (Boclande),     321, 

1505. 
Buckland  Denham  (Boclande), 

274,  IC99. 
Bud,  Budde,  Gorwic',  Gorwy, 

124,  125. 

Henry,  1287. 

of  Northover,  908. 

Richard,  of  Aeston,  933. 

Walter,  124,  383. 

William,  385. 

Budding,  Ralph,  of  Bath,  28. 
Budecumbe,  Budicumbe, 

Henry  de,  199. 

Robert  dc,  1355. 

Budekele.     See  Butleigh. 
Budeville.     See  Bodeville. 
Budicumbe.     See  Butcombe. 
Budiford.  Jordan  de,  1302. 
Budukeleg.     See  Butleigh. 
Buel.     See  Bule. 
Buffler,  Osbert,  626. 
Bugeburi,    Bukeburi,     Peter, 

382(5^'). 

Robert  de,  1470. 

Bugefbrd.  John  de,  I4S4« 
Bugge,  Robert,  448. 

William,  61. 

Bugu',  Hamelin,  1490. 
Buk,  Walter  le,  $72. 
Bukeliu ri.     See  BogeburL 
Bokel,  Richard,  987,  993^ 
Bukiotf/n,  738. 
BukserJe,  682. 
Bulace,  Walter,  877. 
Bule,  Hoel,  John  la,  1 145. 
Matilda,      ^laughter      tA 

Nichcla*  le,  382(y). 

Richard  la,  I  If/). 

Matil/la,  hiA   wife, 

1 100. 

Walter, of  K/He,  265,  383, 

William  le,  1 57,  904. 


3  ^ 


474 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Bule,  William  le,  Petronilla, 
Juliana,  and  Custanda,  his 
daughters,  ib. 

Bulepaun,  John,  93. 

Buleworth,    Henry   de,    3S4, 

385- 
Bulfinche,  William,  1207. 

Bulloc,  BuUok,  Roger,  of 
Cusinton  (Gissington),  887. 

William,  baUiff  of  Taun- 
ton, 122,  132. 

Bulstone  (Bulestan),  304. 

hundred  of,  pp.  46,  314. 

Bum,  William  le,  734. 

Bumgard,  Hugh,  382(41). 

Bun,  Bune,  Hamelin,  452. 

Richard    de,    parson   of 

Hardington,  718. 

Buneweye,  Bungwayn,  Gilbert 
de,  604. 

William  de,  572. 

Burcott  (Burcot),  415, 

Burcy,  Robert  de,  1450,  146 J, 

1475- 

Thorstan  de,  1237. 

Burdon,  121 2. 

Burecote,  GeoffVy  de,  572. 

Richard  de,  572. 

Walter  de,  572. 

Bureford*,  Philip  de,  24. 
Burehenton,  Kipping  de,  122a 
Buret,  Christiana,  1224. 
Richard, 


her 


brother,  ibid, 
William,  1053. 


Burewald,  Nicholas,  604. 

Roger,  604. 

Burgan,  John  de,  1 52 1. 
Burges.     See  Berges. 
Burgeys,  Robert  le,  578. 
Burgh,    Burgo,    Burg,   Burk, 

Hubert  de,  sheriff,  86,  90, 

loi,382(;/),  p.  3. 

John  de,  976,  1338. 

and     Hawise,    his 

wife,  439. 
Purgund',  Walter  de,  304. 
Burguniun,  William  de,  90. 
Buriton.     See  Hourton. 
Burk.     See  Burgh. 
Burkestok'.     See  Rurstock. 
Bume,  Philip  de  la,  351. 

Thomas  de,  351. 

William  de  la,  351,  383. 


Bumel,  Geoifry,  of  Cusington, 

889. 

John,  1 521. 

Roger,  1245. 

Bumeville.     See  Bameville. 
Bumham,  272,  845. 
Bumham,  Theoric    de,    627, 

851. 
Burser,  Geoffiy  le,  274. 
Burstock     (Burkestok*),     co. 

Dorset,  4. 
Burton,  Matilda,  late  wife  of 

Elias  de,  15 14,  1524. 

Robot  de,  627. 

Roger  de,  1425. 

William,  432. 

Bus,  John,  604. 

Buschel,  Bussel,  John,  826 

Richard,  826. 

Walter,  1 1 89. 

Busselar,  Richard  le,  of  Dun- 

heved.  1013. 
Butcombe  (Budicumbe),  409. 
Butecleye,   William    de,    and 

Christiana,  his  wife,  401. 
Buter,  William  le,  1029. 
Buthukeleg.     See  Butleigh. 
Butleigh     (Budekele,      Budu- 

keleg,     Buthukeleg),     270, 

383. 
Butler,     Butyllere,     Butelier, 

Butiller,  Cicely  la,  294. 

Richard  the,  1249. 

Robert  le,  1392. 

William  le,  394(A),  1521. 

Byaumund,  William  de,  936. 
Bydeford,  Bydefaud,  Dionysia 

de,  529. 
Bydesham.     See  Biddesham. 
Bye,  Amice,  late  wife  of  Hugh, 

504.  645. 
Juliana,  wife  of  Henry 

de,  641. 
Bygehausle,  Bygthausle.     See 

Bickenlmll. 
Bygod.     See  Bigod. 
Bykefaud,  Henry  de,  716. 
Bykehull.    See  Bickenhall  and 

Bikehall. 
Hykel.     See  Bikelegh. 
Bykeleng,  William  de,  990. 
Bykeslegh.     See  Bikelegh. 
Byle.     Hyll,    Reginald,    443, 

484. 


Bynortheweye,  John,  1446. 
Bysburthi,  526. 


C. 

Cacche,  Cath,  Kack,  Godfrey, 
of  Holeford,  268,  384,  385. 

Osbert,  267. 

Richard.  1 102. 

William   1 102,  H05. 

Cadbury,  South  (Sukadebir'), 

1431- 
Cade,     Kade,    Adam,     753, 

754. 
Alice,  wife  of  William, 

994. 
Nicholas,  and  Edith,  his 

servant,  754. 
Cadebi,     Kjiddeby,     Kateby, 

Martin  de,  47. 
Osbert,  son  of  William 

de,  882. 

Walter  de,  47. 


Cadewell,  Cadewely,  Henry 
de,  1394,  1396. 

Cadeworth.  William  de.  956. 

Cadyho,  Richard,  11 36. 

Cal,  Godfrey,  1 217. 

William,  1 21 7. 

Caldekot,  Nicholas  de.  666. 

Caldekote.     See  Catcott. 

Calemundesden,  Kalemunden. 
Kalemondeston,  Calomnii- 
desd',  Agnes,  late  wife  of 
Roger  de,  382(1/),  382(51^), 
480,  1366. 

Roger  de,  877. 

Callak,  Peter  de,  604. 

Calvesdon,  Robort  de,  1356. 

Cam,  Marv  de,  127a 

Camber,  Kamber,  Alexander 
le,  1 32 1,  1358. 

Nicholas  le,  796. 

—  Clarice,    his    wife, 


ib. 


Richard  le,  794. 


Cambridge,  390,  p.  352. 
Camel,  Kamel,  Kaumel,   Gil- 
bert de,  382(/i). 

Henry  de,  1018. 

Nigel  de,  901. 

Camel,  473. 

hundred  of,  473, 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS   AND    PLACES. 


475 


Camel,    East    (Camelrumar), 

900. 
—  William,   the   clerk   of, 

901. 

William,  his   son, 

901. 
Camel,  West  (Abbot's  Camel), 

Caroelegh,  John  de,  1 518. 
Cameley  (Camele,  Camelegh), 

10,  959. 
Camelrumar.       See     Camel, 

East. 
Camera,  Robert  de,  625.  1 149. 

Waller  de,  662. 

Campo    Florid o,    Henry    de, 

326,  673. 

John  de,  343. 

Thomas  de,  380. 

Joan  and   Matilda, 

daughters  of,  380. 

See  also  Chamflur. 
Candle  (Candel,  Caundel),  co. 

Dorset,  7,  82,  1344,  1347. 
Caneford.     See  Kentsford. 
Cannin^on  (Caniton,  Canin- 

ton,  ICaninton,  Kantinton), 

304,  616,  672. 

hundred  of,  pp.  40,  320. 

prioress  of,  616. 

Cannonl^h  (Le|!h),co.  Devon, 

prior  o^  119,  395,  555. 
Cantebrig',  Eustace  de,  1009. 
Canterbury,  co.   Kent,   1291, 

p.  131. 

archbishop  of,  89. 

manor    of    Orchard    at, 

42cy. 
Cantilupo,   Cantelupo,   Cantu 

Lupo,  Philip  de,  1149. 

Kichard  de,  564. 

Robert  de,  869. 

WUliam      de,     382(2^), 

868. 


1394. 


and  Eva,  his  wife, 

the  elder,  1456. 
Cantuar',  Nicholas  de,  795. 

Richard  de,  795. 

Cape,   Hugh,    son  of  Hugh, 

114. 

John,  420/,  686. 

Richard,  and   John,  his 

son,  114. 


Capella,  Peter  de,  438. 

Richard  de,  438. 

Thopacia,     his 

daughter,  438. 

Robert  de,  438. 

William  de,  465,  638. 

-  Isabella,  his  mother. 


465. 

Caperun,  Roger,  1472. 

William,  1 137. 

Capes,  Thomas  de,  1069. 

Capie,  Robert,  569. 

Capite  Montis.  See  Down- 
end. 

Capland,  in  Broadway  (Capi- 
lond),  1 182,  1 184. 

Cappen,  John  de,  480. 

Cappilond,  William  de,  188. 

Cardigan,  Benedict  de,  995. 

Hugh  de  and  Amice,  his 

wife,  1420. 

Cardinam,  Robert  de,  p.  133. 

Careter.     See  Carter. 

Carevill,  Karevill,  Beatrice 
de,  26. 

Geoffry  de,  1000. 

Henry  de.   12,  26,  334, 

383.  425»  569,  66$,  839. 

Osbert  de,  1444. 

Philip  de,  328. 

Ralph  de,  1290,  1444. 

William  de,  328,   1463, 


1472. 


Christiana,         late 

wife  of,  328. 
Carhampton        (Carinctun, 

Karenton),  304,  1144,  1150. 
hundred  of,  385,  pp.  51, 

301. 
Carleton.     See  Charlton. 
Carpenter,  Geoffry  the.  829. 

Joice  the,  275,  383. 

John  the,  11 17. 

Ralph  the,  1019. 

Richard  the,  569. 

Stephen  the,  1 198. 

William,  1482. 

Carswell,    Karswell,   William 

de,  877,  1448. 
Carter,      Careter,      Charetcr, 

Christina,  wife  of  Robert  le, 


1089. 


Carter,  Elias  le,  1151. 

Henry  the,  382(/),  414. 

John  the,  1499. 

Meynard,  son  of  Osbert 

le,  979. 

Ralph  the,  848. 

Ricnard  the,  1176. 

Walter  the,  of  Cudinton 


452. 


ter,  ib. 


Agnes,  her  daugh- 


Walter  le,  of  la  Penne, 

971. 
Cary   Fitzpayn    (Schipelcary, 
Stipekary,  istipelkari),  255, 

563,  579- 
Castle    Cary    (Kari),     1 37 1, 

1417. 

Catcott,  in  Moorlinch  (Calde- 

kote,  Katikote),  451,    501, 

503. 
Catenore,  Adam  de,  24. 

Cath.     Su  Cacche. 

Cathanger  (Kathangre),  193. 

Cathanger,  Richard  de,   1296. 

Calsash    (Catthesasse,    Catte- 

sesse),  304,  895,  1046,  1047. 
himdrcd  of,  385,  pp.  56, 

287. 
Catteclive,  Lettice  de,  989. 
Cattesesse,    Catthesasse.     Su 

Catsash. 
Cauketerre,  Robert,  1272. 
Caundel.     See  Candle. 
Caune,  Kaune,  Kausne,  Her- 
bert de,  421,  423.  424,  510. 

William  de,  86,  loi. 

Serlo,  his   servant, 

86,  loi. 
Caure    [?  Cary],    church    of, 

1417. 
Caylloay,  Ralph  de,  420^. 
Caylluel,  Thomas  de,  I4<^5. 
Cede,  Waller,  1414. 
Cedinton,  John  de,  812. 
Cedra,  Cedre,  Ceddre,  Walter 

de,  973,  1037. 
William,  son   of  Walter 

de,  394(«). 
Cedrc.     See  Cheddar. 
(  ciiti,  Robert,  1340. 
Cerne,  John  de,  131 3. 
Henry  de,  394('').    619, 

IC90,  1141,  1285. 
Cerum,  Henry  de,  572. 
Chagge,  Jordan,  229,  383. 


476 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND  PI-ACES. 


Chaldewe  U,  Tbriouu  dc,  1053. 
CJiAltwrfth.     Sre  Crhelwood. 
Oaun)«rUuD,     Chamberleng, 
AlfrH  iht,  S$7. 

Sicjihtn   ihc,  398,  605, 

Walter  Ic.  344.  S^.  7«>- 

William  U,  720. 

Charntlur,  Champflur,   Henry 

fie.  460,  151a 
Amaljel,     wife    of, 

1520. 

Hilaria  de,  isaa 

John  de,  422,  425,  462, 

627,  750. 

Nichola  de,  472,  539. 


Sit  also  Camix)  Mondo. 
(.'hani|)encis,  Koljert,  604. 
Champe>'S,     Robert     de,     p. 

425- 
Champflur.    See  Chamflor. 

Champian,  Robert,  71. 

Chanceaus,  Andrew  de,  1098. 

Chandcl.  Walter,  588. 

Chandot,  Matilda  dc,  2,  69. 

Robert  de,  489,  505,  561. 

and     Amabtl,    his 

wife,  608. 
Chanton,  271,  383. 
Chan  ton,  Geoff ry  de,  423,  587, 

1468. 

Richard  de,  1 492. 

Chanu,  Hugh,  750. 

Robert,  290. 

- —  Thomas  le,  1 502. 

William  le,  841. 

Chany,  Henry  de,  762. 
Chapel  Allcrton  (Alverinton), 

Chapil,  Alice,  of  Kary,  954 

Sre  also  Ca|)ella. 
Chaplain,  Matthew  the,  845. 

Thomas,       his 

brr)ther,  845. 

Maurice  the,  203,  383. 

Nicholas  the,  1 2 13. 

Tettr  the,  335. 

Richard  the,  1 249. 

Roliert  the,  fio. 

Waller  the,  of  Staunton, 

5»7. 
of  Ar,  224. 

Gcrvase,    his   son, 

224. 


Chapman,  Thomas  43S* 

Walter,  604. 

Wolward  the,  761. 

Chard,  fieoffry,  107a 
Chareter.  Si€  Carter. 
Charltf^  (Carleton  Cherletoo. 

Cherlinton),  241,  424,  468, 

614,  696. 

R. ,  chaplain  of,  464. 

Charlton,  in    Kilmersdon 

(Cherelion),  990. 
Charlton  Adam  (Est  Cberle- 

t'^),  r375. 1386,  1388. 1390, 

I445»  1447,  1451. 
Charlton  Horethome  (Cherle- 
ton    Kamill,  Kanvill),  202, 

383.  592. 
Charlirin  Mackerel  (Cherletun 

Makerel),  896. 
Charlton  Musgrave  (Cherleton 

Mucegros,  Muchegos),  14 1, 

383. 
Charterhouse,     near    Wit  ham 

Friary  (Chartu^te),  priory  of, 

953- 
Chart  res,  Savaric  de,  365. 

Chartuse.     See  Charterhouse. 

Chase,  Stephen,  1446. 

Chatcic,  Richard  de,  831. 

Chaub'ge,  William  de,  304. 

Chaundoys,    Amabel,  wife  of 

Robert  de,  495. 

Robert  dc,  517. 

William  de,  1236. 

Chauneleygh,  p.  452. 
Chaverton,  Henry  de,  462. 
Cheddar  (Cedre),  394(w)»  783, 

786,  1021,  p.  liv. 

church  of,  788. 

hundred    of,     pp.    27, 

235. 
Cheddar    (Cenle)     Episcopi, 

1217. 
Cheddeseie.     See  Chedsoy. 
Chedehunt,  41a 
Chedclsy.     See  Chedeseye. 
Chcden,  William  de,  382(3^). 
Chedere,  Henry  le,  and  Eva, 

his  wife,  402. 
Chedeseye,    Chedclsy,    John, 

son   of   Sussanus    (sit)    de, 

1 1 18. 
John,  son  of  Walter  dc, 

1 1 18. 


of\l'iniuBde,  1115. 
WilEua,   MB  flf 

de,  1 122. 
CheHxoT    (Cbeddoeie. 

dele^).  jMSfK  l"S^ 
Cbejcirimont. 
Cheke,  Walter,  947. 
Cbelemimd',   Rqfer,    Oriiot, 

sooof,  124. 
Chdewcvth.    i^rCbelwood. 
Chelewonh,   Ckellevortli, 

Cberdvarth,    Ridvd   de. 

117. 

Robert  de,  4^2. 

Henry  6»,  432,  731, 73«t 

909.914. 
William  de,  731,  914. 

Chelfinf;,  Riduid,  572. 

Chebnafoid        (Chdmerfcfd), 

1341,  1344. 
Chelwood  (Chalewortb,  Cbde- 

worth,   Chetleworth),   208^ 

432.  73«.  734,  924,  925- 
Chep,  Thomas,  43$. 
Chepstowe,  Walter  de.  806. 
Chere,  Walter,  869. 
Cherelton.    See  CharUoD  mmd 

Cherlton. 
Cherelwurth.   .S^Chdeworth. 

William  de,  914. 

Cheriton  (Cheritone,   Cberin- 

ton),  325,  327,  340,  144IX 
North  (NortA  Chiritoo), 

972,  1478. 

South  (Chyriton),  944. 

Cherleton.     See  Charlton  amd 

Cherlton. 
Cherleton  Kamill  or  KanvilL 

See  Charlton  Horethome. 
Cherleworth.     See  Chelwood. 
Cherlinton.     See  Charlton. 
Cherlton,  Cherleton,  Cherel- 
ton, Amabel  de,  429. 

Henry  de,  }94(«). 

son  of  Geofl^  de, 

937 


Jul*,  daughter  of  Gilbert 
de,  836. 

Robert  de,  and  Amabel, 


his  wife,  30. 

Roger  de,  436. 

Cherm,  Robert,  1525. 
Chemelegh.     See  Churolegh. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


477 


Chese,  William,  760. 
Cheseburforde,     Isabella    de, 

940,  p.  XXX. 

Chesecrume,  Richard,  1027. 
Cheseford,  Roger  de,  765. 
Cheselade,  Chesflod,Schislode, 

Sheslede,  36,  540,  664. 
Cheselade,  Cheselode,  Henry 

de,  641. 

Roger  de,  580,  733. 

Chesflod.    See  Cheselade. 
Chesterblade      (Chestrehald), 

316. 
Cheverel,  Alexander    de,    p. 

440. 
Chew    (Chiu,    Chiw,    Chyu, 

Chw),   181,  304,  383,  518, 

764,  1493. 
hundred  of,  386,  pp.  44, 

231,  232. 
Chewton  (Chiuton,  Chiwton), 

304,  958,  994- 
hundred  of,  246,  p.  270. 

parson  of,  307. 

Chickerell    (Chikerel),  West, 

CO.  Dorset,  400. 
Chiffindon,  James  de,  494. 
Chilcompton       (Childecump- 

ton),  957. 
Robert,    the    clerk    of, 

957. 
Child,  Richard  le,  604. 

Walter  le,  of  Greinton, 

881. 

Chillecumb,  Solomon  de,  382 

(3/). 
Chilleheg,    Richard    de,    382 

Chilton,  Richard,  the  clerk  of, 

1486. 

Robert  de,  421. 

Chilton     Cantilo     (Chilton), 

868. 
Chilveston,  Richard  de,  1099. 
Chinne,  Stephen,  604. 
Chinnock  ((^ynnok),  Osmund, 

parson  of,  1463,  1487. 
William,      his 

brother,  1487. 
Chinnock,   West  (West   Cin- 

nok,  West  Cynnok),  420^, 

42011,  42qy. 
Chippel,  Chippel^h,  Walter 

de,  1^1,  1465. 


Chiritone.     See  Cheriton. 
Chiselborough      (Cisselberg), 

978. 
Chissedun,  James  de,  ^20j. 
Chititon,  Stephen  de,  304. 
Chiu,     Chyu,     Chiw,    John, 

1184. 
Randal  de  or  Ranulf,  85, 

1 186,  1 187. 
Chiw.     See  Chew. 
Chobbe,  Ralph,  823. 
Cholre,  Matthew  de,  151 7. 
Choum,  Augustin,  382(5^). 
Cho*ut,  Roger,  son  of,  86. 
Christchurch  Twineham  (Thi- 

wingham),co.  Southampton, 

prior  of,  366,  382(y). 
Christiana,    John,     son     of, 

604. 
Chund,  William,  109. 
Churchehill,  William  de,  819. 
Churchhill,  399,  436,  819. 
Churchyard,  Andrew  of  the, 

1 1 50. 
Chumlegh,   Chernelegh,  Eva 

de,  597. 

John  de,  604. 

Chuvele,  Roger  de,  304. 

Chw.     See  Chew. 

Chynet,   Osbert   le,  of  Dun- 

heved,  loio. 
Chyritone.       See     Cheriton, 

South. 
Ch)!!.     See  Chiu. 
Chyu  ton,  Ralph  de,  958. 
Cigogn^  (Cygony),   Engelard 

de.    Constable    of    Bristol, 

354. 
Cimroc,  Ralph  de,  8. 

Cinnoc,    Cynnok,    John    de, 

290,  470,  864,  980. 

Savaric  de,  394(/). 

Cirencester,  Cymecestre,  Cy- 

rencestre,  Cycestre,  Enyilde 

de,  825. 

John  de,  939. 

Thomas    de,    832,   869, 

904.  980,   982,    1357,    pp. 

I35»  ^Z7- 
the  younger,  479. 

and    Aubrey,     his 

wife,  592. 

Thomas  de,  Cassandra, 


daughter  of,  592. 


Cirencester,  etc,^  William  de, 

934. 
Cirencester,    abbot     of,    382 

(3^.  394(A),  443,  484,  531, 
1028. 

Ciriland,  Nicholas  de,  604. 

Cisselberg.  See  Chisel- 
borough. 

Cissor,  Cyssor,  Ranulph,  of  la 
Sute  of  Wynescumbe,  772. 

Stephen,  1456. 

Ckriches .     See  Cricheston. 

Clanefeld,     Roger    de,     384, 

385. 

Clapton,  in  Gordano  (Clop- 
ton),  366,  395,  476,  874. 

Clare,  Richard  de.  Earl  of 
Gloucester,  562,  1394. 

Earl  William,  his  an- 
cestor, 562. 

Roger  de,  43. 

Clasford.     See  Cioford. 

Qateworthy.  See       Qot- 

worthy. 

Clavemere,  Joan,  late  wife  of 
Richard  de,  660. 

Claverham,  I359<z,  1 361. 

Clavile,  Clavill,  Robert  de, 
394(0,  394(w).  1249. 

William  de,  1065,  1249. 

Clavine,  Robert  de,  142a 

Clay,  Stephen,  of  Emigton, 
274. 

John,  his  son,  274. 

Clayhanger  (Clayhengre),  433. 

Clayhengre,  Christina  de,  and 
Alice,  her  sister.  433. 

Cleeve    (Clive,     La    Cljrve), 

474,    757,    1144,     "51-3. 

1430. 

abbot  of,  543. 

Humphrey,     prior     of, 

1151- 
Robert,  cellarer  of,  1151. 

Simon,  abbot  of,  1151. 

William,  servant  of  the 

cellarer  of,  1151. 

Cleeve,  manor  of,  p.  305. 

Clendon,  Richard  de,  1302. 

Clerk,  Hamo  the,  322. 

Henry  the,  473. 

of  Kari,  1043. 

Edith,  his  daughter. 


478 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AKD  PLACES. 


Oak,   HeniT,   EdcloCa,   faue 

wife  nf,  1082. 

John,  flOD  of  the,  looa 

Homphrey  the,  I. 

r>,brTt  the,  8. 

Ralph  the,  1 151. 

Richard      the,      jSlCr , 

31^21  $w),  626,  806. 
SOD  oC  William  the, 

761. 
Richard    the,    oi  Dun- 

heved,  loia 

Robert  the,  89. 

Roger  the,  806. 

Walter    the,  6q6,    845, 

1384. 

Warin  the,  842. 

William     the.      394(/), 


569,  6ia 
Clevedon  (CliTedon),  312. 
Ocvcdon,  ClivedoD,  CliTedin, 

Matthew  dc,   394(/).    559f 


651.  688,  1035,  pp.  26- 
—  Robert  de,  1019. 
William  de,  6&6. 


CliflFord,       Roger     de,     209, 

QiftoD,  Clifhon,    Roger    de, 

35«.  365.  382(>). 
Clive.  Su  Cleeve. 
Clive,  Clyre,  Clarice  dc  la, 

1022. 
— —  John  de  la,  489. 

C>»bert  de,  757. 

Richard  de  la,  loil. 

Robert  dc,  1 430. 

Wymarca,  his  wife, 

Roger  de  la,  of  Bat- 
comix;,  952. 

William  de  la,  1021. 

Clivedon.     See  Clevedon. 

Cloford  (Cla&foni),  chaplain 
of,  1032. 

Clomc,  Walter,  1 1 78. 

Clopton.     See  Clapton. 

Clopton,  Baldwin  de,  1249. 

John  dc,  989. 

Ralph  de,  382(3/). 

Richard  de,  989. 

Wymark  de,  874. 

Clotworthy        (CUtewurthy), 

1 100,  p.  XXX. 

manor  of,  1163. 


ChBdcsham,  Rkhaid  dc,  1 131,  t  Coker,  Robot  dc,  394(^.  54P» 


1491. 


soo  of  Rjdiard  de, 

Oyve.     See  Ctire  and  Clcerc. 
Cnappe.      Knappe,      Kncpe, 

Gil  ben  de,  394^'. 

Hugh  dc,  1270. 

Ralph,  115. 

Thomas  de,  127a 

Coat,  in  Martodc  (Cotes,  KuCe), 

265,267. 
Cobbe,  Walter,  852. 
Cobbeham,  Richard  dc,  344. 
William    de,    1323,     p. 

Ccbbler,   Alice,   late  wife  of 

Robert  the,  1104- 

Edwzrd  the,  282. 

Geoffry  the,  243. 

Nicholas,  son  of  Roger 

the,  351. 

Roger  the,  383. 

William  the,  100,  1 1 17. 

Coc,  Coce,  Coch,  Cok,  Coke, 

Adam,  42010. 

Ralph,  10Q3. 

Robin,  III. 

Robert,  162. 

wife  of,  162. 


Thomas,  1208. 

William,  420^,  42091, 

of  Cisselbcrg,  978. 

Codinton,  Adam  de,  1347. 
Coffe,  Richard,  1433. 
Coffin,  Cophin,  Adam,  205. 
Cofin,     Richard,     86, 

loi. 
Cogdean    (Cokdon),   hundred 

of,  ca  Dorset,  1394. 
Cogre,    Cogres,    Gerard    de, 

420/. 

William  de,  42or. 

Cok,  Coke.     See  Coc 
Cokdon.     See  Cogdean 
Coker  (fCokre,  Kokerre),  304, 

632,  842. 

hundred  of,  13?,  p.  289. 

East,  717,  1429,  1481. 

North  (Nortcoker),  396, 

732. 
Coker,   Gerald  and   Matilda, 

his  mother,  394(>&}. 
Martin  de,  396^ 


I      627,  1237. 

!  William     dc,       394(i), 

»      594(/).98a 

I  Cokerd,  Robert,  24a 
Cole,  Henry,  of  Kenn,  761 
John,  931,  932,  p.  xlix. 

:  Ostiert,  267. 

I  Martin,  $ix 

'  Ralph,  s8i. 

Rkhard,   of   Kingestoo, 


Walter,  his  brother. 


962. 

Roger,  1522,  p.  133. 

Thomas,  1369. 

Walter,  604,  1 196,  1359. 

1364. 

William,  931. 

of  HmicspUl,  359, 

383. 

See  tds*  Cule. 

Coleford  (Culeford),  136a 

Colestan,  and  Edith,  his  wife 

73. 
Colet,  Robert,  of  Fifhide,940  . 

Coling,  William,  578. 

Colkin,  Walter,  121 5. 

Columbariis,  Colombers, 

Henry  de,  2. 

Hugh  de,  394f. 

Matthew  de,  877. 

and    Matilda,    his 

wife,  559,  651. 
Philip    de,    889,    1071, 

1 149,  1 156,  p.  xlviL 
Robert    dc,    329,     3:13, 

383.  533.  569.  673,  682, 

looi,  1337,  I344»  1347, 

1376,  1385.  1391.  1395. 

1397,  141 1,  p.  Ixx. 
Comb  Aimer  (Combe),  co. 

Dorset,  1394. 
Combe  (Cumb),  183, 184,  190^ 

329.  383.  "75- 
manor  of,  p.  309. 

Will,  son  of  the  chaplain 

of,  1 175. 
Combe,  near  Bruton  (Cumbe), 

1450. 
Combe,       near       Dulverton 

(Cumbe),  1491. 
Combe,        Cumb,        Cume, 

Alexander  le,  1313,  1329. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PIECES. 


479 


Combe,  Alvred  de,  304. 
Combe,  Eustache  de,  841. 

Hugh  de,  382(4^. 

John  de  la,  471,  833. 

Alditha,  wife  of,  tb, 

Jordan  de,  Gilbert,  son 

of,  124. 

Martin  le,  1463,  1467. 

Ralph,  son  of  Durant  de, 

941. 

Reginald  de,  473. 

Richard  de,  30,  31,  57, 

304,  339»  381.  482,  665. 

and  Helar*,  his  wife, 


349(^)»  394(^).  665. 
and  Elena,  his  wife, 

613. 

Robert  de,  804. 

Roger  de  la,  709. 

Thomas  de,  1463,  1467. 

William    de,   206,  383, 

1450. 

of  Howeton,  1 47 1. 

son  of  Andrew  de, 

655. 
Compte,  Adam  de,  1422. 
Compton  (Cumpton),  300,  370, 

1276,  1469. 
Compton,  Bishop  (Cumpton), 

772,  777. 
Compton    Dando    (Cumpton 

Godfrey,      Cumton),     208, 

210,  383.  920. 
Compton   Dunden  (Daunon), 

1506. 
Compton   Martin  (Cumpton), 

957,  958,  1062. 
Comton,   Cumptun,   Cumton, 

Adam  de,  735. 

Hawise  de,  963. 

Henry  de,  777. 

Stephen  de,  382(32). 

William  de,  382(2^). 

Wyot  de,  1221. 

Comyn,    Cumyn,  John,    724, 

1288,  1292. 

Walter,  503. 

Conchelueston,  1078. 
Cone,  Ralph,  1182 
Congresbury      (Cungresbyr*), 

manor  of,  p.  228. 
Constantin,    Costantin,    Cos- 

tentin,  David,  855. 
—  Gerard,  1481. 


Constantin,       Gerard,       and 
Margery,  his  wife,  1429. 

Cook,  Adam  the,  514. 

Hugh  the,  701,  762. 

John  the.  382(21),  869. 

Peter  the,  841. 

Richard  the,  1 147. 

of  Merlon,  Jordan 

the  man  of,  989. 

Robert  the,  292. 

Serlo  the,  1249. 

Walter,  son  of  John  the. 


883. 
son  of  Ralph  the, 

969. 

William  the,  632,  1355. 

father    of   Adam, 

563. 
Copenor.  John  de,  627. 

Cophin.     See  CofHn. 

Copin,  Nicholas,   of   Cherlc- 

worth,  924,  p.  XXX. 

Coppe,  Jordan,  604. 

Nicholas,  of  Rolveslon, 

1339. 

Richard,  188,  448,  1285. 

Robert,  1029. 

Corbet,  James,  1463,  1478. 

Thomas,  324,  327,  34a 

Corbin,  Corbyn.  Emma,  1056. 

Henry,  589. 

Philip,  589. 

Robert,  921. 

Roger,  9a 

Walter,  1454. 

William,  395 

Corescumbe,  Agatha  de,  821. 
Corf,  Edwin  de,  1083. 

William  de,  1 5 18. 

Corfe  (Corf),  1083.  1350. 
Cori,  Cory,  Allelinus  de,  966. 

Robert,  1 132. 

Cormaill,  John  de,  877. 
Comishman,  David  the,  1 151. 

Ranulf  the,  604. 

Comwaleys,  Philip  le,  1344. 

Ranulf  le,  890. 

Cornwall.  Peter  le,  794. 

Richard,  Earl  of,  420/n. 

Corston,  204. 

Richard,     parson     of, 

564. 
Corton  (Corfton),  1279. 
Corub',  Peter,  806. 


Cor^.    See  Cori. 

Cosm,  Cusin,  John,  of  Merke- 

stok,  413. 
Cosin,  Richard,  1096. 

Walter  643,  837. 

William,  1522. 

Cosington,   Cusington,  Alice, 

daughter  of  Lettice  de,  887. 
Walter  de,   1436,  1437, 

1438. 
Cossington  (Cusinton,  Kusin- 


ton),  306,  ^13,  397,   Wi, 
623,  &3,  fe7- 
89,  1382. 


23i  55 ^  623,  &3, 


John,  parson  of,  313. 
Costantin,    Constentin.      See 

Constantin. 
Cos3m.    See  Cosin. 
Cote,  John,  500,  694,  iiii. 

Thomas,  1497. 

Walter  de,  520. 

Cotele,    Alice,    late   wife   of 

Robert,  311. 

Richard,  311. 

and  Christiana,  his 


wife.  1371,  1417,  1483. 

Robert.  1425. 

Cotelein,  Richard,  52. 
Cotenor  Kytenor,  Geoffry  de, 

496,  1488. 
Coterel,    Koyterel,      Arnold, 

604. 

Richard,  598,  604. 

William,  1430. 

Cotes.    See  Coat. 
Coteswald,  Ralph  de,  394(/). 
Counte,  William,  124. 
Coventry,    co.    Warwick,    p. 

135. 
Cowike  (Cuwyke),  co.  Devon, 

Harewuda,  prioress  of.  1 1 52. 
Crabbe         alias         Grubbe, 

Matilda,  late  wife  of  Ran- 

ulph.  1343,  1349. 
Craft.     Sre  Croft. 
Cran.     See  Crane. 
Crandon,  in   Bawdrip  (Kran- 

dun).  1 127,  1 153,  i486. 
Crandon,  Henry  de,  474. 

Hugh  de,  461. 

Joan  de,  i486. 

William  de,  474. 

Crane,  Cran,  Adam  le,  886. 
John  le,  858. 


48o 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Crane,  Thomas  le,  of  Button, 

773. 
Cranemere,  Cranmer,  Daniel 

de,  78S. 

Stephen  de,  70a 

Cranmore  (Cranmere),  manor 

of,  1061. 
Cratelegh,  John  de,  1515. 
Crawcumbe.  Joan,  late    wife 

of     Godfrey     de,      1342, 

1350- 
Wyburga  de,  iioo. 

Crawecumbe.  See  Crow- 
combe. 

Crawedon,  Walter  de,  1131. 

Cray,  Robert,  11 33. 

Crec.     See  Crek. 

Crede,  Theynewin,  998. 

Creech  (Criz,  Cryche,  Kris) 
164,  304. 

manor  of,  1072. 

Crek,  Crec,  Crok,  Adam,  754, 

931.932. 
Henry.  382(0;),  857. 

Crestred,     Wilham,    son    of 

Adam,  1 231. 
Crestrell,  Adam,  1230. 
Crewkeme  (Cruk')  304, 394(w). 

435,  524,  1244,  1246. 
hundred  of,  385,  pp.  50, 

321. 
Crewkeme,  John,  parson  of, 

528. 
Crichcston,     Ckriches,    John 

de,  312. 
Cridehun,  William,  of  Stapell, 

109a 
Crie,  John,  643. 
Crikere,  Richard,  1348. 
Criket,  Richard,  1355. 
Crileberhe,   Bartholomew  de, 

425. 
Cristesham,  593. 
Critele,  Walter,  282. 
Criz.     See  Creech. 
Croft,  Crofta,  Crofter,   Hugh 

de  la,  1 143. 

Mauger  de,  8. 

Osbert  de,  of  Mellens, 

820. 

Ralph  de,  382(5^). 

William  de,  1430. 

Crok.     See  Crek. 
CrokerepiU,  Crokkerpill,  598. 


Cromer,  Adam,  of  Cheddar, 

788. 
Crowcombe,     (Crawecumbe), 

179,907,  "S^i  "59.  1342, 

"350. 

manor  of,  p.  307. 

CrowenhuU,  Robert  de,  931. 
Cruce,     Cruces,    Adam     de, 

1 1 50. 

Herbert  de,  303. 

John,  965. 

Roger     de,    of  Seven- 

hampton,  1463,  1477. 
Crude,  John,  1 501. 

William  de,  48. 

Crudelincot,  Ralph  de,  103. 
Cnies,    Knies,    Richard    de, 

131,  383. 
Cruir,  William  le,  1376. 

Cruk'.    See  Crewkeme. 

Cruke,  Kruke,  Adam,  son  of 

Godiva  de,  691. 

Agnes,     late      wife     of 


Walter  de,  353. 

—  Algar  de,  376,  394. 

—  Avice,     late      wife 


of 


Robert  de.  658. 

—  Herbert,   the   goldsmith 

of,  376. 

—  John  de,  216. 
Elias,  his  brother, 

216. 

—  Nicholas  de,  306,  658. 

—  Robert  de,  1247. 
Thomas  de,  627. 


Cmket,  Crukert,   Ralph    de, 
8. 

Thomas  de,  423,  706. 

and  Joan,  his  wife, 

867. 
Cral,  Richard,  460. 
Crumhale,    Robert    de,    382 

(4«). 
Crutok,  Robert,  572. 

Cryche.     See  Creech. 

Cubillejfohn,  1053. 

Cuch,  Elyas,  801. 

Cudecumbe.     See  Cutcombe. 

Cudewurth,  Joan  de,  1 218. 

William  de,  12 18. 

Cudinton,  Walter  the  recrc  of, 

4J2. 

Cudworth,  1223. 

Cule,  Adam,  1 1 18. 


Cule,  Richard,    of  CherltoD, 

995- 
Roger,  1 151. 

See  also  Cole. 
Culeford.    Set  Coleford. 
Culmeton.     See  Kilmington. 
Cumb,  Cumbe.      See  Combe 

and  Temple  Combe. 
Cume.    See  Combe. 
Cumpton,  Cumton.  See  Comp- 

ton. 
Cumpton  (jodfrey.  Su  Comp- 

ton  Danda 
Cumwz,    Cunyz,    Robert  de, 

415,  423. 

Robert,  his  grand- 


father, 423. 
Custance. 


his 


mother,  423. 
Cumyn.     Ste  Comyn. 
Cungresbyr*.  5«^Congresbary. 
Cunte,  Reginald  le,  304. 
Cunteville,  Cuntevill,  Cunter- 

ville,    Henry    de,    19,    60, 

530,  569,  1273. 
Nicholas  de,  478,  571 

858,  1334. 

Peter  de,  567,  855. 

Richard  de,    567,    853, 


855,  "463,  1466. 
—  Robert  de,  406,  421, 667, 
1316,  1334. 

William  de,  851. 


Cur*,  James  de,  12. 
Curecy,    CurcelP,    Wandring 
de,  12. 

William  de,  382(5/). 

Cureford,  Jollanus  de,  1327* 
Curi.     Su  Curry. 
Curilade,  Hugh,  604. 
Curiot,  Richard,  604. 
Curipole,    Sampson   de,  382 

(SA 

Curirevell.     See  Cunv  Rcrel. 
Curland,   in  Staple- Fitzpaine 

(Curylandc).  1275. 
Curmalin,  John,  8>1. 
Curry     Mallet    (Curi,     Karl 

Malel).  187,  193. 

William,  reeve  of,  346. 

Curry,     North      (Noithkury, 

Norhtcur*,  Nordcury,  Nort- 

curi),   164,   173.   304,  598, 

II91. 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


481 


Cuiry,  hundred  of,  385,  pp.  42, 

313. 
Curry  Revel  (Curirevell),  304, 

1202. 
Curteis,      Curteiys,    Curteys, 

Heni^  the,  604. 

Richard,  382(3^). 

Curtenay,  Henry  de,  273. 
Reginald,  his  man, 

273. 

John  de,  looo. 

Mary  de,  1519. 

Robert     de,     7,     376, 

382(21/),    383,    394(w),    p. 

135. 

William  de,  1280, 1459. 


Curtnes,  Richard  al,  1520. 
Cusin.     See  Cosin. 
Cusingham,  Robert  de,  1330. 
Cusinton.    See  Cossington. 
Cusoyw,  Richard  de,  1 149. 
Cut,  Cute,  Adam,  785. 

Walter,  his  son,  ib, 

Ralph,  his  son,  ib. 

Elyas  de,  785. 

Herindus,  8cS. 

William,  115 


Cutcomhe  (Cudecumbe),  431, 

1498. 
Cuvert,  William  de,  1528. 
Cuwyke.     See  Cowike. 
Cygony.     See  Cigogn^. 
Cylteme,  Ralph  de  and  Elena, 

his  wife,  804. 
Cynnok.     See  Chinnock  and 

Cinnoc. 
Cyrcestre.    See  Cirencester. 
Cyrel,  Roger,  425. 
Cyrencestre.     See  Cirencester. 
Cymecestre     See  Cirencester. 
Cyssor.    See  Cissor. 


D. 

Dacus.     See  Deneys. 
Dandon,  Deandon,  Deudune, 

Hamelin    de,    395,     1091, 

1418. 
Danes,  Daneis,  Daneys.    See 

Deneys. 
Daniel,  Dainel,  Daynel,  Fulk, 

306. 
Ada,  his  wife,  306. 


Daniel,  Susanna,  wife  of,  44. 

Thomas,  533. 

William,  306. 

Dare,  Walter,  1137. 
Daunan,  Sweyn,  son  of,  308. 
See  also  Weston,  Sweyn  de. 
Daunay.     See  AIneto. 
David,  John,  son  of,  845. 
Dean  (Dene),  210. 
Dean,  Alice  de,  896. 

Peter  the,  1322. 

Robert  de,  1463,  1478. 

Roger,     of     Dunestore, 

1155. 

Roger,  of  Selver,  1167. 

Thomas  le,  of  Kynges- 


ton,  761. 

Deandon.     See  Dandon. 

Ded,  William,  383. 

William,  of  Stoke  Gun- 
ner, 177. 

Deket,  John,  382(0:). 

DelvestoQ,   William    de,    382 

(2^). 
Den.     See  Dean. 

Denebaud,  William,  756. 

See  also  Enebaut. 
Deneford,  Walter  de,  p.  118. 
Denepol.     See  Dumpole. 
Denepol,   Dunepol,  Hugh  de 

and     Margery,     his    wife, 

I374»  1393- 
Deneys,        Dacus,        Danes, 

Daneys  Agnes,  late  wife  of 

Adam  le,  720. 

Geoflfry,  422. 

Gilbert  le,   394(/),   423, 

463. 

John  le,  382(5). 

and  Rose,  his  wife, 


1309,  13^8. 
Rose,  late  wife  of  William 

le,  720. 
William    le,    332,    347, 

380,  394(0. 
Denise,     Nicholas,     son     of, 

321. 
Deorecuyl.     See  Orekoyl. 

Deppeford',  Adam  de,  33. 

Matildi,  wife  of  Osbert 

de,  85. 

Thomas  de,  33. 

Derccr,  Thomas,  1497. 

Dereberg,  Hugh  de,  394^. 


Dereberg,     Derneberg.      See 

Durborough. 
Dermot,  an  Irishman,  959. 
Denvin,  Henry,  282. 

Hugh,  252. 

Mabel,  daughter  of,  282. 

Nicholas,  282. 

William,  282. 

Despenser,  Baldwin  le,  382  (3/). 

Hugh  le,  382(3^1. 

Henry,  his  son,  ib. 

John,  1482. 

Deudecumbe,     William     de, 

382(3it>). 
Deudune.     See  Dandon. 
Deuras,  William,  382(2^). 
Deveneys,  John,  569. 

Stephen  le,  982. 

Richard  le,  1414. 

William    le,    428,    534, 

972. 
Gilbert,  his  father, 

534. 
Devere,  Mary  de,  806. 

Deverel  (Devcreus),  co.  Wilts, 

968. 
Deverel,    Devereus,    Edward 

de,  968. 

Godfrey  de,  1287. 

Henry,  1521. 

Devon,   Roger  of,    185,   203, 

383. 
Dicheshet,   Dicheshayt,  Ebbe 

de,  697. 

Robert  de,  loio. 

Dicmere,  William  de,  394(/). 
Diggelford,  Robert  de,  114. 
Diggenescove.     See  Discove. 
Dillington,   Dilinton,    Robert 

de,   292,    602,    720,    1 123, 

1 182. 
Dilverton.     See  Dulverton. 
Dinder  (Dinre),  1438. 
Dinham,    Dynam,   Dyneham, 

Geoffry  de,  587. 

Oliver  de,  1273,  1524. 

Dinnington  (Doniton,  Duning- 

ton),  35,  576,  1477. 
Dis,  Adam,  1092,  1093. 
Discove  ( Diggenescove,  Dych- 

enestone),  2,  35,  1472. 
Diskole,   Orguillusa,    wife   of 

Huward  de,  1 1 8. 
Dispensar.     See  Despenser. 

3  Q 


482 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Dit cheat  (Dychcshete),  parson 

of,  1480. 
Dillon,  Walter  dc,  617. 
Diure,  (ieoffry,  569. 

William,  569. 

Div-isis,  Nicholas  de,  424. 
Divole,  William,  1092, 
Do,  William,  1427. 

Laurence,     his 

brother,  ih. 

Docking,  Adam  dc,  382(52'). 
Dod,  John,  1528. 
Do>ldington  (Dodington),  338. 
Dodinge,  Waller,  859. 

Hugh,  his  father,  ib 

William,  859. 

Do<linton,  Ro^cr  de,  338. 

William,  his  son,  338. 

Dogti,  Hugh,  1223. 

Ralph.   1241. 

Richard,  94a 

Dogj^esem,  Gcoffry,  2lo. 

Dokcl,  Roger,  172. 

Dokkel,  John  de  and  Clarice, 

his  wife,  1523. 
Dolling,    William,   640,   666, 

764. 

Hawise,  his  wife,  ib. 

Thomas,  his  son,  ib. 

Agnes,  his  daughter,  ib. 

Donemere,  W' illiam  de,  585. 
Doniton.     Su  Dinninglon. 
Donniford  (Duniford),  1 154. 
Donyatt  (Dunyete),  1 178. 
Dorccsire,         William        de 

382(3^). 
Dorchester,  co.  Dorset,  p.  3. 

Rol)ert,  the  merchant  of, 

211. 

Dore,  Juliana,  1 020. 

Dorset,     Alexander    de,    301, 

308,  383. 

mother  of,  301. 

Tetcr  de,  8o5. 

Matthew  de,  1451. 

Dossel,  William,  304. 
Doueliz.     See  Dowlish. 
Doueliz,  Duueliz,  Eustace  de, 

510,  1203,  1227,  1228. 
Dover,    co.    Kent,    port    of, 

804. 
Doverhay  (Duvreye),  452. 
Dovill,  Ralph  de,  302. 
Dow,  Laurence,  1 5 16. 


Dowaddon,  Henry,  768. 
Dowlish  (Duueliz,    Doueliz), 

196,  3l^Z.  1201,  1223,  1224. 

water  of,  1 1 79. 

Downend      ( CafUe     Montis  ^ 

ChifdelmufU)^      229,     304, 

1 109. 

burgh     of,    229,     1070^ 

1 07 1,  p.  xlvii. 

Downhead  ( Dunevde,  Dun- 
hcv-id),  383,  394(/),  626, 
740.  IQ17. 

Robert,    the   reeve    of, 

740. 

Doylby,  William,  448. 
Doyly.     See  Oyly. 
Draicote.     See  Draycote. 
Drail,   Drayl,    Herbert,    233, 

237»  384,  385. 
Drak,  Geoffry  le,  of  Menedun, 

384,  385- 
Draper,  Geoffry  the,  of  Brid- 

port,  looi. 
Walter,  his  brother, 

ib. 
Drave,  Hugh  le,  596. 
Diay,  William  de,  1 241. 
Draycote  (Dreicot),  39,  785, 

1467. 
Draycote,  Draykote,  Draicote, 

Edith  de   and   Henry,   her 

son,  1463,  1467. 
Henry    de,    301,    420^, 

488. 

John  de,  632. 

Richard  de,  487,  632. 

Robert  de,  484. 

Simon  de,  361,  383. 

Walter,  brother  of  Wil- 
liam de,  488. 
William    de,   304,   352, 

383,  394(0,  632. 

Drayton,  632,  1198. 

Drayton,  Rol^rt,  son  of 
Thomas  de,  434. 

Dre,  Walter  de  and  Julia,  his 
wife,  1356. 

Dreicot.     See  Draycote. 

Drench,  John,  1496. 

Dreng,  Herman,  of  Blake- 
done,  131. 

Drenger,  Richard,  1496. 

Droskere,  Hugh.  383. 

Dubel,  Ralph,  484. 


Dnc,  Duck,  Godfrey  le,  254* 

239.  384,  385. 
Richard  le,  1346. 

Duddlestone,    in     Pitminstcr 

(Dudlestoo),  1083. 

Dodesham,  William  de,  14561 

Dttlcot   (Dunticot,    Doltinoot, 

Dultiijgrot,       DuldiDOote), 

134.  823,  1422,  1426,  1436, 

1437.  1438,  1439- 
Dole,  Arnold,  206. 
Dulling,  Robert,  1 501. 
Dulticote,  Dultingcote,   Alan 

de,  134. 

Bernard  de,  134. 

Melicent,  wife  of, 

134. 
John  dc,  314. 

Matilda  dc,  134. 

Richard  de,  823. 

Dulting,     Richard     de     and 

Denise,  his  wife,  402. 

Dulverton    (Dilverton),    304, 

1491. 
hundred  of,  283,  125a 

Dummer,     in     Ca^le     Gary 

(Dunmere),  420«f. 
Dumpole  f  Denepol),  in  Ilmin- 

ster,  1374. 
Dun,      Robert,      183,     184, 

383. 
Thomas,     of     Berton, 

1049. 

Dunden,  in  Compton  Dun- 
den  (Dundon,  Dyandon, 
880,  886,  1287. 

Dundray.  Robert  of,  931. 

Dundry  (Dundray),  553,  931. 

Ehme,  Adam  de  la,  1355. 

Hugh,  son  of  WUliam, 

1 174. 
Richard  de  la,  62a 

Dunepol.     Su  Denepol. 

Dunerre,  Geoffry  de,  821. 

Dunestor.     See  Duoster. 

Ehmestore,  Herbert  de,  115a 

Hugh  de,  394(«). 

Duneyet,    John    and    Roger, 

sons  of  Fromund  de,  11 78. 
Dunheved,  Adam  de,  425. 
Emisius  de,  394(0.  4l8, 

419,  422,  552,  587,  626, 

740,.  100 1,  loil,  1015, 

1016,  1017,  1288. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


483 


Dunheved,       Emisius       de, 
Nicholas,  his  son,  626. 
Geoffry  de,  497,    1277, 


1280,  12^ 


of  Cumpton,  777. 
Nicholas  de,   552,   740, 


1017. 

Walter  de,  345. 


Dunhevid.     See  Downhead. 
Duniford.     See  Donniford. 
Dunigston.    See  Dunston. 
Duning,  Jordan,  70. 
Dunington.     See  Dinnington. 
Duniton',  Dunigton,  Odo  de, 

Simon  de,  382(>'). 

Dunkerton,  Alvred  de,  185. 
Dunkeswell    (Dunckewell), 

abbot  of,  332. 
Dunroere.     See  Dummer. 
Dunmere,  Dunnemere,  Henry 

de,  510. 

Ralph  de,  510. 

William    de,    510,   511, 

689. 

Richard  de,  420^,  420m. 


Dunstcr  (I)unestor),  223,  304 

383.  577,  594.  1 142,  1 1 50 

1155. 

burgh  of,  227. 

church  of,  223. 

prior  of,  636,  675. 

Dunston,       in       Clayhangcr 

(Dunigston),      co.     Devon, 

1216. 
Dunwear,       in       Bridgwater 

(Dunewer),  295,  1121. 
Dunyete.  See  Donyatt. 
Durand,  Durant,  John,  604. 

Richard,  683,  685. 

Durborough    (Derebcrg,  Dcr- 

neberg),  659,  687. 
Durecote,  831. 
Durecotc,  Henry  de,  831. 

Richard  de,  831. 

Durevill,  Eustace  de,  250. 

Robert  de,  8. 

Durham,    Philip,    bishop    of, 

p.  I. 
Duriman,  Robert,  1287. 
DurstoQ.     See  Exlereston. 
Duueliz.     See  Dowlish. 
Duvreye.     See  Doverhay. 
Dyandon.     See  Dunden. 


Dychenestone.     See  Discove. 
Dycheshele.     See  Ditcheat. 
Dynam.     See  Dinham. 
Dynaud,  Geoffry  de,  929. 
Dyneham.     See  Dinham. 
Dyril,  Odo  de  and   Risidina, 
his  wife,  456. 


E. 

Elarl,  Henry,  son  of  the,  342. 

Richard  the,  420^/. 

Eamshiil  (Emeshille).  219. 
Easton,   in  Gordano    (Eston, 

Agelineston,   t^elingeston), 

18,  40,  200,  358,  383. 

chapel  of,  46. 

Richard,  the  tithingman 

of,  873. 
Eastwick,  in  Wellow  (Ekewik, 

Eggewyk),  363,  709,  1343, 

1349- 
Eblesburye,  74. 

Ebor,   Eboraco,    William  de, 

provost  of  Beverley,  394(r), 

42a/,  p.  126. 
Ebroctis,  Clarice,  maidservant 

of  Stephen  de,  150. 
Eckewyk,  Ekewyk,  Henry  de, 

626,  709. 
Edde,  Richard,  604. 

Robert,  604. 

Edelstaen.     See  Elston. 
Edenigston,  Edineston,  733. 
Edereston    [prob.     Durston], 

prior  of,  382(4^). 
Bxigcott    (Achecote,     Hache- 

cote),  CO.  Buck.,  1392. 
Edington,  1468.  p.  Ixxiii. 
Edingtone,    Edinton,    Robert 

de,  889,  1290,  1468. 

William  de,  690. 

Edin^orth       (Jedelesworth), 

1400. 
Edith,  Stephen,  son  of^  1463, 

1467. 

Edriche,  Geof&y,  1121. 

Edstock  (Ichestoke),  336. 

Adam,  reeve  of,  336. 

Ranulf,  of  the  -church- 
yard of,  336. 

Edston,  in  Stogursey  (Edew- 
ston),  687. 


Edward,     Richard,    son    of, 

1015. 
Edwin,  Henry,  604. 

Robert,  son  of,  394(»'). 

Efy,  Robert  de,  383. 
Egelineston.      See  Easton  in 

Gordano. 
Egforton,  cdias  Fairoke  (EflFer- 

ton,  Ehforton),  628. 

Thomas,    chaplain    of, 

545. 
Egge,  William  del,  933. 

Eggewyk.     See  Eastwick. 

Egleston,  abbot  of,  p.  I. 

Eglof,        Egolf,        Egglehof. 

F^lawy,  John,  1309,  1316, 

1333. 

Ralph,  1 1 38. 

Ehforton.     See  Egforton. 
Ekewik.     See  Eastwick. 
Ekewyk.     See  Eckewyk. 
Elborough,  in  Hutton  (Hilles- 

bergh),  590. 
Elemenistre.     See  Ilminster. 
Elias,   Elyas,  Alice,   wife  of, 

809. 

Cecily,  daughter  of,  344. 

John,  his  servant,  809. 

Elmark,  Reginald  de,  1 1 28. 
Elston,  in  Yeovil  (Edelestan), 

281. 
Elvete,  William  de,  304. 
Elworthy  (Helewortny),  339, 

357,  459. 
Ely,  Eley,  Walter  de,  382(41). 
524,  1249. 

Matilda,  wife  of, 

1519. 

Elyas.     See  Elias. 
Elyot,  William,  1452. 
Emcleburgh,  Emneberg,  Emle- 
birrs,      Bartholomew      de, 

394(0,    1440,    1461,    149*. 

p.  444. 
Isabella,  his  wife, 

1492. 
Emelot,  Henry,  son  of,  1044. 
Emeri,  Walter,  853. 
Emigton.     See  Hemington. 
Emlebirrs.     See  Emcleburgh. 
Emma,  Geoffry,  son  of,  569. 

Robert,  son  of,  569. 

Roger,  son  of,  204. 

Emneberg.    Su  Emcleburgh. 


484 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Emundesham,      Walter     de, 

382(5i). 
Enappe  [  ?  Cnappe],  604. 
Enebaut,  Philip  de,  330.     See 

also  Denebaud. 
Engaine,    Engayne,     Henry, 

779. 
Vital,  382(52/). 

Engelby,  William  de,  720. 

Englefcld,  Englefeud,  William 

de,  1392,  1406.  p.  425. 
Engleys,  Lengleis,  Baldwin  le 

and    Alice,   his   wife,   433, 

701. 
Enmore  (Enemere),  1456. 
Erbier,  Richard,  604. 
Ercedekne,  Thomas  le,  407. 
Erdinton,  William  de,  606. 
Erie,  Erlegh,  Henry  de,  693, 

791,  1326. 

Erlegh, ,  1267. 

Ermenteriis,    Geoflfry  de     p. 

118. 
Erneshillc.     See  Earnshill. 
Ernewy,  Peter,  642,  727. 
Emisius,  Clarice,  daughter  of 

Richard ,  son  of,  584. 

William.  884. 

Erriol,  John,  son  of,  760. 
Escalle,  Robert  de,  420^/. 
Escaudeford,       Martin       de, 

382(3^^). 
Escot,  William  le,  382(5jr). 
Escumb,  Warreis  de,  1249. 
Esgar,  William,  757. 
E^arest  on .   See  G  arston,  East . 
Esgod,  Robert,  604. 
Eskelling,  John   of,  Thomas, 

1451- 

Walter,  394(y)- 

Esquier,  Esquire,    Hugh  the, 

1151. 

William,  son  of,  328. 

Esse.     See  Ash. 

Esse,  Andrew  de,  1067,  1501. 

Daniel  de,  472. 

Girard  de,  1054,  1 504. 

Johnde,  394(/). 

Richard  del,  11. 

Agnes,  wife  of,  1 1. 

See  also  Assche. 
Essebyr,  John  de,  703. 
Elssehe,  water  of,  1245. 
Essehelde,  1239. 


Essel^,  Walter  de,  139,  317, 

383. 
Essemore,  115. 

Esson,  William  de,  83. 

Est  Brente.     See  Brent,  East. 

Est  Cherleton.     Su  Charlton 

Adam. 
Estawell,  Henry  de,  627. 
Estcherton.       See  '  Charlton 

Adam. 
Estcinnok,  Edith,  late  wife  of 

Thomas  de,  981. 
E^tcoker.     See  Coker,  East 
Estcoker,   Margery,   daughter 

of  Benedict  de,  1481. 
Ralph,  son  of  Richard 

de,  1429. 
Estcumbe,  Richard  de,  1091. 
Robert,    the    clerk    of, 

1091. 

Thomas,    the   clerk    of, 


IC91. 

Eating,  Stephen  de,  chamber- 
lain of  Glastonbury,  366. 
Estington.     See  Ashington. 
Estleg.     Su  Esselegh. 
Estmer,  Elyas,  807. 

Machtill,  806. 

Estmodesham,  Walter  de,  737. 

Estmund, ,  304. 

Eston,  1359,  1364. 

Eston.    Su  Aston  and  Easton 

in  Gordano. 
Estover,  Walter  de,  1 1 13. 
Estperet,   850.     Su    Perrott, 

East. 
Estrange,  John  le,  861. 
Estre,      Joan,     daughter      of 

William  de,  1 1 88. 

Richard  del,  6,  186. 

Walter  del,  6. 

Gervase,    brother 

of,  6. 
Eststrepeston,  490. 
Estuna.     See  Aston. 
Estur,  William  de,  605. 
Eswelbrig,  Roger  de,  383. 
Eswike.     .SV^Ashwick. 
Esy,   Robert    de    and    Alice, 

his  wife,  369,  383. 
Euenberg,    Euilebergh.      See 

Hewenbeig. 
Eustach,  John,  of  Lambrook, 

454- 


Evenbergh,  fishpond  of,  1005. 
Everard,  Richard,  1 137. 

Thomas,  857, 862. 

William,  ici,  220,  627, 

851,  1497. 
Evercrecch  (Evcrcryz,   Hcvc- 

criz),  404,  1484. 
Evercy,  Thomas  de,  182(3^). 
Everle,    Everlegh,    Everlevc, 

John  de,   540,   722,   1082, 

1456. 
Evesham,  Nicholas  de,  1266. 

Ralph  de,  682. 

Exchequer,  Lawrence  of  the, 

527. 
Exe,  Ralph  de,  p.  433. 

Exebridge,  co.  Devon^  p.  433. 

Exeford,  William  de,  114a 

Exeter,  co.  Devon,  1266,  pp. 

3»  426. 
mayor  and    citizens    of, 

1268,  1293. 
Exford,  1 133,  1265. 
Exon,  Henry  de,  1247. 

Matilda  de,  794. 

Exton    (Exeton),    285,    383, 

385. 
Exton,  Exeton,  John  de,  1263. 

William  de,  338. 

Walter  de,  IC97. 

Eylward,       Nicholas        and 

Matilda,  his  wife,  853-5. 


F. 
Faber,  Walter,  of  Stoclande, 

4202f. 

Fabien, ,  66. 

Facunbrige.     See     Faulcon- 

berg. 
Fader  (?  Faber),  Ralph  le,  94. 
Faiher,  Henry,  569. 
Fair  {.Albus),  Walter  the,  189. 
Fairchidd,  Avice,  99. 
Fakeford,  45a 

Cp,     Huver&keford      and 

Netherfiedceford. 
Falclond,  Walter  de,  looc. 
Falconer       {Austurcarius)^ 

William  the,  8,  43. 
Fardayn,   Fardeyn,    Nicholas 

le,  1256. 
Ralph,  542. 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


48S 


Fareman,  Robert,  382(3^0. 

Fibele,  Thomas  de,  811,  8i2. 

Fiu  Payn,  William,  1384. 

WUliam,  98.  1124. 

Robert,  his  man,  ib. 

William,  his  grand- 

Farenberg.        See         Fann- 

Fichet,  Fychet,  Aubrey,  68. 

father,  ib. 

borougn. 

Geoffry,  885. 

Fitz    Peter,   Geoffry,   justice. 

Farlegh,  John  de,  1080. 
Farmborough        (Farenberg, 

Hugh,  24,  68,  421,  423, 

23»  P-  I- 

587,  627,  932,  1522. 

Fitzurse,    Ralph,    627,     932, 

Ferberg),  105,  208. 

Robert,  304,   346,    383, 

1151. 

Famham,  Alan  de,  609,  pp. 

742,  1488,  1522. 

Robert,  84,  loi. 

I35»  »!"• 

William,     627,     H45, 

Fitz  Warrenne,  Fulk,  609. 

Farrington  (Ferenton),  602. 

1287,  1482. 

Fivehead  (Fifchcad),  193. 

Fauconberge.     See    Faulcon- 

of  Merche,  423. 

Fize.  William,  1093. 

berg. 

of   Little   Sutton, 

Flandre,  William,  382(2^). 

Fauder,  William,  223. 

889. 

Flaxley  (Flexleg),  co.  Glouces- 

Faulconberg,      Faucunbcrge, 
Facunbrige,     Eustace     de. 

Fiddington   (Fitinton),    1233, 

ter,  abbot  of,  660. 

1240. 

Flegghe,  Thomas,  1151. 

p.  2. 

Fil,  John  de,  964. 

Fleming,      Flenieng,      Flem- 

Walter  de,   1069,  1503, 

Filesham,  John  de  and  Hugh, 

mang,  Geoffry  de,  551. 
iSchard,  80,  p.  3. 

1504. 

his  brother,  394(r). 

Faulkland,      in      Remington 

Filetham,  Alfred,  son  of  John 

Roger  le,  316. 

(Fouklande),  644,  1280. 

de,  1079. 

William  le,  383,  438. 

Fayrlok,  William,  of  Stapell, 

John,  son  of  Edwin  de. 

Flemmang.     See  Fleming. 

1080. 

1079. 

Flexlegh,  Roger  de,  806. 

Feld,  Adaoi  de  la,  1456. 

William,   son   of   Hugh 

William  de,  806. 

Felton,  in  Winford,  929. 

de,  1079. 

Flintford,  665. 

Felton,  Hugh,  son  of  Reginald 

Filkeford,  water  of,  1085. 

Flo^ierare,  Adam  le,  277. 

de,  929. 

Filton,  Robert,  son  of  Aluina, 

Florentin,  John  de,  199. 

Agnes,  his  wife,  ib. 

de,  915. 

Flowelere,  Adam,  383. 

Fenhamton,  Gervase  de,  420^, 

Filturar',  Thomas,  806. 

Fluri,  Flury,   Denire,   wife  of 

420». 

Finecumb,    Fynecum,    Fyne- 

Ranulf  de,  48. 

Fenne,  Grace  de  la,  1225. 

don  («V),  Ralph  de,  1490. 

John  de,  1038. 

Henry  de  la,  604,  066. 

William,  son  of  Harding 

Margery  de,  679,   1282, 

Fennes,  William  de,  382(5/). 

de,  285,  383. 

1288.  1305,  1323. 

Ferag',  Adam  de  and  Alice, 

Fingnes,  Ingram  de,  1069. 

William,    her  hus- 

his wife,  35. 

Fisel,  William.  1 150. 

band,  679.     See  also  Bud- 

Ferberg.     See  Farmborough. 

Fisherman,     Alexander    the, 

villc,  Margery, 

Feregare,     Thomas     de,     of 

377»  383- 

Randal  de,  420(/),  508, 

Holewall,  20i. 

Herbert  the,  1499. 

1082,686,  1418. 

Ferenton.     See  Farrington. 

Henry  the,  1355. 

Thomas,  115. 

Fobbester.     See  Vobster. 

Fernagu,  Henry,  1 126. 

Nigel  the,  1355. 

Fembrige,  Ivo  de,  67. 

Richard  the,  802,  908. 

Fodington,  in  Babcary  (Fodin- 

Femton,  John  de,  420^. 

Roger  the,  1456. 

don),  659. 

Ferrers,      Ferers.       Ferariis, 

Walter  the,  604. 

Fokeput,  Waller  de   145a 

Agatha  de,  1394. 

William  the.  1499. 

Foklande.     See  Foulkland. 

Ralph  de,  428,  440,  569, 

Fisurs,  Ralph  de,  587. 

Folcard,  William,  991. 

624,  653,  1281. 

Fitelford,  John  de,  940. 

Folic,  Jordan,  son  of,  1184. 

Robert  de.  323,  383. 

Fitinton.     See  Fiddington. 

Fonte,  Andrew  de,  1355. 

Simon,  569. 

Fitz  Payn,  Margery,  563,  579. 

Henry  de,  486. 

Thomas  de,  732,  980. 

Robert,     382(2^),     424, 

Hugh  de,  355,  383. 

Ferum,  Robert  le,  383. 

587,  1368. 

John  de,  790. 

Fcrur,  Geoffry  le,  1482. 

Roger,  563. 

M&rtin  de,  773. 

Fever,  Richard  le,  908. 

Rol)ert,     his    son, 

Alice,    his    wife. 

Roger  le,  572. 

563. 

ib. 

Fibele,  Fubelc,  George,  812, 

Margaret,  wife  of, 

Richard  de,  471. 

John  de,  877. 

514. 

William  de,  572. 

486 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Fontibus,  Ralph  de  and  Joan, 

his  wife,  36,  37. 
Fool,  Simon  the,  161. 

William  the,  207. 

Ford  (La  Forde),  abbot  of,  4, 

S32,  1446. 

township  of,  744,  1522. 

Ford,  Forda,  Adam  de,  744. 
Thomas,  his  brother, 

744- 

Alexander  de  la,  934. 

GillH-Tt  de  la,  996,  11 51. 

Henry  de  la,  1 151. 

John   de,   of  Cusington, 


889. 


Kol)crt  de  la,  984,  1521. 

of  Chew,  766. 

John,  his  son,  766. 

Roger     de,      1 16,     126, 


334- 


Roger    de,   sheriff,    149, 


293- 


Roger  de  la,  126. 

Felicia,    daughter 


of,  126. 


Robert,    son     of, 


127. 


Walter  dc  la,  334,  476, 

666. 
William  de  la,  1082,  p. 

xlix. 
Forda.     See  Bathford. 
Forester,  James  the,  199. 

Peter  the,  97 1. 

Richard,  1 59,  383. 

Stephen  the,  88. 

William  the,  of  Frome, 

Fos>ard,     William,     382{3w), 

420J,  470,  864,  990. 
Foteii,  Adam  le,  1044. 
Fouklande.     See  Faulkland. 
Foulkland,  Adam  de,  1280. 

Agnes  de,  644. 

-    David,    her    son. 


644. 


Walter  de,  644. 


Fowler,  Peter  the,  153. 

(iilhert,  brother  of,  153. 

Fox,  William  le,  of  HevAik, 

858. 
Foxcote,  833. 
Foxf  rd,  1 147. 
P'oxford,  Luke  de,  1147. 


Franc  Robert  le,  of  Prestd, 

438. 

Waller  le,  521. 

Francess,  Franceis,  Franccys, 
Fraunceys,  **  the  French- 
man." Adam  le,  47. 

Andrew,  son  of  William 

le,  406. 

John  le,  638,  8c6. 

John,  of  Fakeford,  450. 

Matthew  le,  1331. 

Nicholas    le,    257,   383, 

384,  385. 
Ralph  the,  658. 

Richard  le,  247. 

Robert    Ic,    569,     1 013, 


1015,  1020,  1507. 
Walter  le,  604.  623. 


Franckenny,        Henry       de, 

382(5^). 

Frank,  Richard,  of  Camel- 
nimar,  90 r. 

Frank  eham,  Robert,  of  Bake- 
well,  929. 

Frankeviir,  Milo  de,  43. 

Franklin.  Frankelain,  Franke- 
leyn,  Henry,  184. 

John  le,  450. 

Lewina  la,  760. 

Nicholas  le,  4201. 

Richard  le,  455,  572, 600. 

Richard  the,   of  Saford, 

1091. 

Robert  le,  1455. 

Walter  le,  588,  760,  761, 


I151. 

—  William  le,  449,  988. 
William  the,  of  Nether- 


cote,  548. 
Fraxino,  Gerard  de,  of  Coker, 

632. 
Freh*a,  William,  53. 
Frenchman.     Se€  Francest. 
Frende,   Baldwin,   of   Stoke, 

977. 
Richard,  91. 

Frere,  Adam  le,  566. 

Freye,   Adam  le,  of  Cusing- 
ton, 889. 

Frier,  Roger  le,  887. 

Friker,  Thomas  le,  of  Hole- 
wall,  385. 

Frome,    12,    304,    394A, 
1029. 


Frome,  hundred    of^   pp.   49, 

286. 
Frome,  Dyonisia  de,  639. 
James  de,   and  Cecily, 

his  wife,  639. 
Fromund,  Heri>ert,  882. 

Alice  his  wife,  ib. 


Robert,  1092, 1286,  1358. 

Fubcle,  Fable.    Su  Flbele. 
Fagel,    Fuel,    William,    200, 

383,  384,  385. 
Fukepu'te,  Walter  de,   1488, 

1518. 
Fukeram,  William,  422,  678, 

1272,  1440. 
Fuller,  FuJur,  Amice,  late  wife 

of,  796. 

Hugh  the,  277. 

Nicnolas  le,  of  Fozford, 

1 147. 

William  le,  1 1 38. 

Wolward  ihc,  927. 

Osanna,    his  wife, 

ib, 
Funtel,  William  de.  394(i). 
Fumell,  Funiceys,   Femyaus, 

Furneans,    FumcttS,    Adam 

de.  4S3- 

Alan  de,  330,  510,  528. 

1218,  1373,  1389.  1407. 

Henij  de,  362. 

Gcoffry  dc,  33a 

Philip  de,  362. 

Matthew  de,  668. 

Richard  de,  1513. 

Stephen  dc,  706. 

Futsadame,  John,  son  of  Wil- 
liam, 1027. 

Fntur,  Richard  le,  172,  383. 

William  le,  115. 

Matilda  bis  uster, 

115. 

Fychet.     Su  Fichet. 

Fynecum,  Fynedon  {sic).  See 
Finecumb. 


G. 

Gaddel,  Henry  de,  i^. 
Gaderwyn,  Roger,  of  Dorset, 

1264. 
Gaipio,  Thomas,  ^2{2u). 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


487 


Galameton,    Adam    de,    382 

Galbridge,  in  Martock  (Gavel- 
brig),  1170. 
Galemore,  Robert  de,  789. 
Galhampton    (Gelehampton), 

324. 

Gabenus,  Nicholas,  son  of, 
680. 

Galle,  Geoffry,  of  Taunton, 
104. 

Gallinarius,  Fulk,  806. 

Galmington,  in  Wilton 
(Galumpton),  1374. 

Galopin,  William,  59,  786. 

Galumpton.  See  Galming- 
ton. 

Gangy,  Nicholas,  1496. 

Gannok,  1302. 

Gant.     See  Gaunt. 

Gape,  le  Gappe,  William, 
796,  806. 

Garclippe,  Bertram  de,  321. 

Geoffry,  his  bailiff, 

3*1. 
Garden,  de  Gardino,  Emma, 

wife    of    Walter    de,    and 

Robert,  her  son,  816. 

Gilbert  de,  696. 

Hamo,  of  the,  455. 

John,  8. 

Robert,  1 147. 

Gardener,  Nicholas  the,  212, 

383. 

William  the,  757. 

Gardino.     See  Garden. 
Gargate,  Peter,  750. 
Garlond,  Roger,  382(5r). 
Garnage,  David,  1 287. 
Garston,    East    (Esgareston), 

CO.  Berks,  609. 
Gascoin,  Robert  de,  of  Dun- 
don,  889. 
Gascony,  321,  p.  bdv. 
Gatekumbe,  Ralph  de,  933. 
Gatemor,    Gatimore,     Gote- 

more,   Robert    de,   394(»), 

902. 

Sybil  de,  1467. 

Gatesden,     John    de,      506, 

984. 
Peter    de    and     Cecily, 

1528. 
Gatton,  John  de,  1^3. 


Gaumbun,   John,    of    Frome, 

643- 
Gauntj  Gaun,  Gant,  Henry  de, 

394(«),  420s»,  469,487,510, 

520,    574,   603,   615,    618, 

627,  693,  694,   714,    1060, 

1326. 

Maurice    de,   294,   378, 

487,  1303. 
Robert  de,  991. 

Robert,     son     of, 

382(4/1). 
William 


de  and  Eme- 
line,  his  wife,  1309,  1 316, 
1318,  1319,  1332,  1333. 

Gavelbrig.     See  Galbridge. 

Gavelbnig,  Eadin  de,  454. 

Ralph,  454. 

Gay,  El',  1287. 

Gele,  the  Gelus,  Robert,  255, 
1506. 

Gelehampton.     See  Galhamp- 
ton. 

Gene,  Walter,  154. 

Gentil,  Reginald  le,  451. 

Geoflfry,  a  fnar-preacher,  813. 

Adam,  son  of,  934. 

David,  son  of,  276. 

Gilbert,  son  of,  1506. 

John,  son  of,  315. 

John,   son    of,   of   Pen- 

sowy,  1 121. 

Philip,  son  of,  1499. 

Sabina,      daughter     of. 


522. 


Walter,  iii6. 

Walter,  son  of,  460. 

William,  son  of,  83,  565. 

Gerard,      Gerrard,       Girard, 
James,  son  of,  23,  382(2/1). 

Lettice,  his  wife,  63. 

John,  1066. 

Martin,  1099. 


Gcrlingeton.     See  Yarlington. 
German,  Juliana,  wife  of,  894. 
Gernefeld.     Su  Yamtield. 
Gernun,  Henry,  25. 
Ranulf,  and  Isolde,  his 

wife,  25,  680. 

Robert,  25. 

Alice,  his  daughter, 

John,  uncle  of,  35. 
William     and     Hawise, 

his  wife,  556. 


Gersum,  William,  11 50. 
Gervase,  Gervays,  Christiana, 

daughter  of,  1 180. 

John,  569. 

Jordan,  son  of,  699. 

Walter,  569. 

Walter,      of     Bridport, 

looi. 
Geudeford.     See  Guildford. 
Ghyatton.     See  Yatton. 
Giffard,  Osbert,  394(yl. 

Robert,  of  Esse,  1067. 

Walter,  1521. 

William,  1 501. 

Gilbert,  John,  806. 

Nicholas,  son  of,  294. 

Richard,  son  of,  777. 

Roger,  son  of,  1506. 

Sewell,  son  of,  1206. 

Gillingham,    manor     of,   co. 

Dorset,  967. 
Gillingham,  William  de,  1014. 
Gimeges.     See  Jumi^ges. 
Gingeston*,  Simon  de,  49. 
Girard.    See  Gerard. 
Giremvill,  Ralph  de,  304. 
Giselade,  Ralph  de,  529. 
Giseli,  Ralph  de,  529. 
Givele.     See  Yeovil. 
Glamorgan,  115. 
Glasford,  Peter,  son  of  Gervase 

de,  215. 
Glastonbury    (Glaston),    284, 

401,    434i   586,   717.   787» 

129a 

church  of,  p.  134. 

Glastonbury,    Glaston,    Glas- 

tonia,  abbot  of,  322,  383, 

394(0,  503i  550,  552,  572, 
688,   736,   787,    818,   889, 

919,  909.  1046,  1378,  1510, 

p.  *34- 
Serjeant  of,  247. 

chamberlain     of.        Set 

Esting. 
Harold    de,    513,    521, 

623. 

Isolde  de,  398. 

Michael,  abbot  of,  419, 

587,605,  730f74i,  i3'2. 
Robert,  abbot  of,    276, 


300 


William,  abbot  of,  605. 
William,  reeve  of,  741. 


488 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Glaunvill,   Glenvill,    William 
de,  981. 

Glide,  Walter,  267. 

Glocue.     See  GoldclifF. 

Gloucester,  Glouc',    archdea- 
con of,  1323. 

Benedict  de    and  Dyo- 

nisia,  his  wife,  1008. 

Laurence  de,  1225. 

Richard  de,  of  Haggele, 


1216. 

—  R.,  earl  of,  1526. 

Quintin,  his  clerk, 


1527. 
Glowe,  Ralph,  168. 

Roger,  168. 

Glut,  Adam,  1355. 
Godemanston.      See  Godman- 

ston. 
Godesblescinge,  Robert,   152. 
Godeshill,  Hugh  de,  382(0). 
Godevere,  572. 
Godfrey,  Godefirei,  Robert,  son 

of,  479.  592. 
Roger,  195. 

Walter,  son  of,  42020. 

Godinogh,  William,  205. 

Godman,  Philip,  of  Kinmers- 

don,  991,  p.  zxx. 
Godmanston,     Godemanston, 

Henry  de,  974. 

William  de,  424,  587. 

Godriz,  Robert,  382(^). 
Godwin,  Godwyne,   Edward, 

son  of,  240. 

Ralph,  1470. 

William,  382(3»). 

Goky,  Richard,  164,  385. 
Goldcliff  (Golclive,    Glocue), 

CO.  Monmouth,  prior  of,  2, 

269,    382(4Z(/),   461,    1 166, 

1380,  1399- 
Goldclive,  Adam,  528. 
Golde,  Geoffry,  255. 

John,  1497. 

William,  1184. 

William,  son  of  Hilary, 


948. 

Goldina,  Robert,  son  of,  247. 
Goldive,    Thomas,     son     of, 

1124. 
Goldsmith,   Agnes,   late  wife 

of  Robert  the,  1339,  1341, 

1353. 


Goldsmith,  Alvred  the,  4. 

John  the,  1038. 

Peter  the,  and  Agnes,  his 

wife,  699. 

Robert  the,  697. 

William  the,  394(m). 

Golling*,  Elviva,  daughter  of, 

la 
Gorewy,  Martin,  790. 
Gorge,  Ralph,  1145. 
Gomay.     See  Gumay. 
Goseberd*.  William,  152. 
Gosle,  Gosshull,  Thomas  de, 

1229,  1347. 
Gotemore.     See  Gatemore. 
Gothull   [PGodshUI,  in   Yat- 

ton],  1516. 
Goviz,  William  de,  378. 
Gowd,  Ralph,  99. 
Gojrs,    Goyz,   Walter  le  and 

Agnes,  his  wife,  666. 
Walter  le,  of  Merlinche, 

889. 
Gracelegh,  Thomas  de,  705. 
Grafenloyl,  Grassenleyl,    Gil- 
bert,  468,   683,   684,   685, 

941,  1267. 
Gras,  Adam  le,  577. 
Robert  le,  of  Parleston, 

1 146. 

WilUam  le,  Z^2{^. 


Grascy,  Geofl&y  de,  732. 

Grastame.     See  Gresteyn. 

Grave,  Peter,  son  of  Robert 
de,  2J4. 

Walter  de  la,  317. 

Gravelin,  William,  1 506. 

Greberge,  Ralph  de,  1446. 

Gredere,  Robert  le,  of  Shoker- 
wyk,  745. 

Gremton.    See  Grenton. 

Grene,  John  de  la,  936. 

Greneweye,  Stephen  de,  1479. 

Alice,    his     wife, 

ib. 

Agnes,  his  sister-in- 
law,  ib. 

Grenne,  Peter,  1287. 

Grenton',  Greinton',  Hugh  de, 
14,  19,  22. 

Sabina,  wife  of,  14, 


19,  22. 


therof,  19. 


Richard,  bio* 


Grenton*,  e/r.,  Matilda, 
daughter  of  Rc^er  de,  8a 

Reginald     £,      Abreay 

wife  of,  30,  31. 

Grenville,  Greneville,  Grenne- 
ville,  Greynville,  Adam  de, 
768. 

Reginald  de,  8. 

Richard  de,  46,  51. 

William  de,  131 7,  1323. 

and  Joan,  his  wife, 

1282,  1288. 

Gresteyn  (Grastame,  Gres- 
teng),  abbot  of,  382(4^),  984. 

Gridlekote,  Ralph  de,  680. 

Grifiin,  Hugh,  472. 

Robert,  loi*. 

Grindham,  Grindeham,  Grim- 
ham,  Grindlam,  Adam  de, 
586. 

William  de,  33, 421,  423, 

587.  932. 
Grmiton,  Hugh  de,  32a 

Grom,  Richard  le,  382(2/). 

Grubbe,  alias  Crabbe,  Matilda, 

wife  of  Ranulf,  1343,  1349- 
Grugge,  Richard,  738. 
Gubaud,  John,  330,  383. 
Gubbe,  Alan,  1491. 
Guildford     (Geudeford),    co. 

Surrey,  314. 
Guket,  Walter,  1 144. 
Gukewyll,  Peter  de,  1488. 
Gulafre,  John,  1287,  1292. 

Jordan,  1287. 

Reginald,  1287. 

Gule,    Alice,     late    wife    of 

Thomas,  649,  1 181. 

John,  son  of  Gilbert,  171. 

Roger,  of  Bukwell,  935. 

Gulebare,  Geofiry  de,  42OM. 
Gulie,  Gulye,  Robert,  son  of 

Jordan,  173,  J83,  385. 
Gundevill,  Hugh  de,  302. 
Gunell,    Agnes,    daoghter  of 

Geoffiry  de,  1 256. 
Gunne,      Williimi      de    and 

Christiana,  his  wife,  583. 
Gupil,   Gupyll,   Regmald,  of 

Kantekesiuivd,     174,    383, 

389. 
Gurdemere,  Thomas,  448. 

Gurnard,     Roger,     38a(3iif), 

38a(5^ 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


489 


Gumay,     Gornay,     Gyverny, 

Ansell  de,  1502. 

Hugh  de,  382(5.6). 

John  de,  13,  77. 

Maelus  de.  553. 

Muriel,  wife  of  Roger  de, 

938. 


Peter  de,  553. 

—  Ralph  de,  627. 

—  Richard  de,  612,  672. 
— Robert,    his    son, 

612,  618. 

—  Robert  de,   171,  420f^), 

J^oC^).  553.  569.  574,  714, 
841.964,  1303,  1 310,  1328, 

1377,     1379      1383,    1384, 
1401,  1404,  p.  441. 

Matthew,  his  attor- 


ney, 1328. 

Hawise,  his  grand- 
mother, 553. 

Margery,  hisdaugh- 

ter,  1000. 

7 Philip  and  Warin, 

his  brothers,  171. 

Gyald,  Walter,  no. 

Gyane,  Gyayne,  Gyanne, 
Gyaines,  Adam,  394(///), 
422,  424,  425,  510,  &S. 

Simon,  597. 

■  William,  604. 

Gydi,  Adam,  299. 

Gymel,  Gilbert,  434,  586. 

Gynes,  Thomas  de,  394^. 

Gyode,  John,  1287. 

Gyvelton,  Richard  de,  902. 

Gyverny.     See  Gumay. 


H. 

Hache,  Gervase  de,  1 187. 

Thomas  de,  321. 

Hache,  Hacche.     See  Hatch. 
Hachecote.     See  Edgcott. 
Hacherdon,  Thomas  de,  1085. 
Haddel,  1470. 
Haddimer.  1 368. 
Haddon,    in    N.    Petherton, 

1470. 
Haddon,  Thomas  de,  160. 
Hadimer,  Denise,  late  wife  of 

Thomas  de,  1368. 
Hadlow,  Richard  de,  1526. 


Haegham,  Elias  de,  806. 
Hag^elegh,  12 16. 
Haghermere,  William  de,  of 

Klivedon,  761. 
Haia,  Haie,  Nicholade,  loi^, 

382(20. 
Haiweie,  Thomas  de,  383. 
Hakehel.    See  Hakewell. 
Haket,  Robert  and  Alice,  his 

wife,  1528. 

William,     394(/),    424, 

473»  1017,  1463,  1464. 

Hakewell,    Hakehel,     Henry 

de,  1219. 

William,  437. 

Hakkeford     Eskeling.        See 

Shilling  Okeford. 
Haldgard,    Martin,    son    of, 

814. 
Hale,    Halle,    Hele,    Hyele, 

Adam  dc  la  and  Wymarca, 

his  wife,  1 151,  1507. 

Hugh  dela,  1053.  nil. 

Richard    de    la,     1463. 

1467. 

Victor  de  la,  518,  776. 

—  Erneburga,  his  wife, 


ib. 


—  Robert,  his  son,  f^. 
Halecumbe,  Aylbriht  de,  114. 

Richard  de,  114. 

Richard,    his 


114. 

—  Richard    de    with 

eye,  114. 


son, 


one 


Haleford,  Hugh  de,  323. 
Halesweye,  Agatha  de,  841. 
Haleswortb,  Alan  de,  739. 
Haleway.     See  Ho^eweye. 
Halewaye.     See  Hoi  way. 
Hale  well,    Haliwell,    Jordan 

de,  674. 

Ralph  de,  1488. 

Richard  de,  674. 

Halfurling,  Adam,  806. 
Halingele,  Aubrey  de.  446. 
Haliwell.     See  Halewell. 
Halle.     See  Hale. 
Hallehors,  Henry  and  Isabella, 

his  wife,  525,  526,  558. 
Halse   (La  Hanse),   prior  of, 

1 168. 
Halse,  Holse,  Jocelin  de,  472. 
— -  Sampson  de  la,  1446. 


Halse,  Sellol  de,  1446. 

See  also  At  halse. 
Ha'swell,  486. 
Halton.     See  Holton. 
Hal  ton,  Andrew  de,  965. 
Cecily,     daughter 


of 


Alfred  de,  1055. 
—  Gervase  de,  1463,  1478. 
Walter  de,  1 12,  683. 


Halum,  Nicholas  de,  357. 
Ham     (Hamm^s,     Hamme), 

165,    437»   469.   487,   627, 

1099,  II 13,  1 1 16. 

manor  of,  p.  256. 

Hambridge  (Hambrigg),  448, 

453,  602. 
Hamhrigge,  Simon  de  448. 
Hamdon  (Homcdon),  1266. 
Hameliii,  Roberf,  1097. 

Walter,  577. 

Hamiletim',  Robert,  II II. 
Hamington.    See  Hemington. 
Hamlegh.     See  Hanley. 
Hamme,  Hammes.    See  Ham. 
Hamme,  John,  son  of  Walter 

de,  891. 

Walter  de,  764. 

William  de,  501,  595. 

Hamo,  father  of  William,  7. 
Hampton,    Agnes,    wife    of 

Gervase  de,  494. 

William  de,  940. 

I  lanespull.     See  Huntspill. 
Hanley,     Hamlegh,    Hanlee, 

Henle,  Joan,  wife  of  Nicho- 
las de,  1526,  1527. 

John  de,  656, 1020,  1 5 10. 

Hanney  (Henneye),  co.  Berks, 

1394.  .     ^ 

Hanton,  Henton,  Anketil  de, 

964. 

William  de,  ^82(5./),  964. 

Har,  Alvred  le,  40. 

Harald,  Henry  and  Alice,  his 

wife,  712. 

Roger,  923. 

Walter,  783. 

Harrington,  274,  842,  979. 

—  manor  of,  620. 

parson  of,  718. 

Richard,  parson  of,  4205, 

560. 
Hardinqton,  Adam  de,  982. 
Wi'liam  de,  394(^),  478. 


3  p 


490 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Hare,  William,  356. 

William  la,  of  La  Lade, 

921. 
Harefot,  John,  382(5^). 

Richard,  382(5^). 

Ilarenge,  Gilbert,  1034. 

Walter,  985. 

Harethum.     See  tlorethome. 
Harewode,  Harewudd,  Geof- 

fry  de,  1 131. 
Isabella,  wife  of  Warin 

de,  943. 

Robert  de,  1 131. 


Harpcford,  Herpeford,  Jordan 

de,  42cy,  686,  1107,  1271. 
Jordan,  son  of  David  de, 

595- 
Harper,    Harpur,     Adam   le, 

1521. 
Alice,  late  wife  of  Randal 

the,  213. 

Geotfry  the,  213,  276. 

John      the,    213,     1343, 

1349- 

Stephen  le,  ofCusington, 


889. 
Harpiree(Harpetre),  Reginald 

the  clerk  of,  775. 
Harptree,    Thomas,     son     of 

William  de,  13. 

Eva,  wife  of,  13,  77. 

Hartclifle  (Hareclive),  304. 
hundred  of,  pp.  47,  262, 

385. 
Hart  land     (llertiland),  ?    co. 

Devon,  1289. 
Hartrow  (Haretrowe),  458. 
Harward,      Christiana,      late 

wife  of  Ralph,  657. 
Hasard',  Sybil,  84. 
Hasel,  553. 
Haselbere,    Adam    de,     448, 

1285. 
Hasel  berg,  David  dc,  375. 
Hastevilain,  Henry,  703. 
Hasweye.     See  Ash  way. 
Hatch       (Hacche,       Hache, 

Hecche),  19-21. 
Hatch    Beauchantp,    1 1 84,  p. 

XXX. 

Hatch,    West,   604,   1184,  p. 

XXX. 

Hatton,    Agnes,  wife  of  Ger- 
vase  de,  420/. 


Haul).  John  de,  303. 
Hauberton,  John  de,  873. 
Hauecwell.     See  Hawk  well. 
Hauecwell,  John  de,  377. 
Hauekere,  John,  649. 
Haulketon,  Philip  de,  946. 
Haulo,  Richard  de,  1527. 
Hause.     See  Huse. 
Hauteville,  Thomas  de,  394(0> 

768,  841. 
Hauton,  1494. 
Havebcrg,  585. 
Haveberg,     Haveneberg 

Haverburgh.     Su    Hewen- 

berg. 
Havering,  Robert  de,  1517. 
Hawde,  Ilbert  de,  62. 
Hawegood,  Jordan,  147. 
Haweie,    Thomas     de,     183, 

184. 
Hawise,  William,  son  of,  750. 
Hawkridge  (Haueckrig),  385. 
Hawk  well,     in     E.      Anstey 

(Hauecwell),  377. 
Hawode,  Heywode,  209,  678, 

1272. 
Haydon,     Heidun,    Heydon, 

Agnes  de,  382(51). 

Matilda  de,  276. 

Sampson  de,  737,  1025. 

Hayrun,      Heyrun,    Thomas, 

811,  812. 
Hay  ward,  Colin  the,  240. 

John  the,  604,  822,  1 241. 

Nicholas  the,  1 151. 

Reginald  the,  of  Cumbe, 

1175. 
Thomas  the,  252. 

Walter  the,  ol  Hamme 


1117. 

William,  of  Kinmersdon, 


996. 

Heathfield(Hetfeld),  1488. 
Hecche.     See  Hatch. 
Hecumbe.     Sec  Hescombc. 
Hedenbir,  Henry  de,  483. 
Hedwey,  Stephen,  153. 
Hegge,  Kobert,  149b. 
Heghton,      Heyglon, 

ander,  1453- 

Nicholas  de,  394^7. 

Heginge,  John  de  la,  1090. 
I  leidun.     See  Haydon. 
Heiwod',  Herbert  de,  45. 


Alex- 


Hele.     See  Hale  and  Hill. 
Helesdone,  Ralph  de,  1 357 
Heleweyweye.     See  Hoi  way 
Heleworthy.     See  Elworthy. 
Heliun.     See  Helyun. 
HcUeworthy,  Warin  de,  459 
Helt,  Robert,  of  Were,  847. 
Helton,  Waller  de,  723. 
Hcly,  Walter  de,  568. 
Helyim,    Heliun,   Robert  de, 

1463,  1466. 

William  de,  1466. 

Heme,  William,  1 138. 
Hemington  (Hamington,  Em- 

igton,     Himingdon),     274, 

591,  992. 
Hemmegrave,  688. 
Henebir.     See  Houibere. 
Hengestering.       See       Hen- 

stridge. 
Henle.     See  Hanley. 
Henneye.     See  Hanney. 
Henry,  Walter,  son  of,  397. 
Henstridge        (Hengestering, 

Henxereg,        Heynstrug^e, 

Henstrig),   201,    683,    684, 

723- 
Henstrig.     See  Henstridge. 

Hen  ton     (Hanton)     Mertoc, 

267. 
Henton.     See  Hanton. 
Henxereg.     See  Henstridge. 
Henyiok,  Richard  de,  437. 
Heose.     See  Huse. 
Herbert,     Andrew,     son     of, 

382(r). 
Herd.     See  Hert. 
Herdccote,  Vincent  de,  1462. 
Herdewyk,  Richard  de  la,  of 

Yatton,  762. 
Herding,  Herdig,  Walter,  son 

of,  858. 
William,    son     of,    and 

Emma,  his  wife,  76. 
Here,  John  le,  of  Kadehiwys, 

384. 
Heredes,  William,  of  Sipton. 

140,  384. 
Thomas,    son     of, 

140. 
Hereford,  1 362. 
Hereford,  Jordan  de,  724. 

Walter  de,  172,  383. 

William  d^,  475. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


491 


PI  ere  ward,    Cecily,    wife    of 
William,  470. 

John,  1082. 

Hericun,  Thomas,  327. 
Herle,  Henry  de,  430. 
Herolf,  John,  182. 
Herpeford.     See  Ilarpeford. 
Heit,  Herd,   Adam  le,  299, 

1151. 

Richard, 


his 


brother,  1151. 

—  Gervase  le,  1 140. 

—  Reginald  le,  976. 

—  Richard  le,  572. 

—  Robert  le,  940. 

—  Walter  le,  572. 
William  le,  572. 


Hertford,  p.  356. 

Hertur,  John  le,  572, 

Hescombe  (Hecumbe),  23. 

Hese.     See  Huse. 

Hessod,  146. 

Hetteld.    See  Heathfield. 

Hethcumb,  Sybil  dc,  1425. 

Hethcumbe,  1425. 

Wodecroft  in,  ih. 

Hethfend,  Hugh  de,  1 157. 

Hevecriz.     See  Evercreech. 

Hevel,  Roger,  of  Yatton,  758. 

Hewenbcrg,  Hewnebergh, 
He  weneshar ,  I  lavebei  g, 
Haveneberg,  Haverburgh, 
Hevenbar,  Havenebare, 
Euenberg,  Euileberg,  Bar- 
tholomew de,  421, 422,  424, 
587,  812. 

^—  Edith,  wife  of  William 
de,  585. 

Geoffry  de,  470,  626. 

Robert  de,  382(w). 

Walter  de,  104- 1 1 1, p.  27. 

William   de,   396,  420^, 

470,  981,  990. 

Hewise.     S<e  Huish. 

Heydon,  737. 

Heydon.     See  Haydon. 

Heygton.     See  Heghton. 

Heyles,  W^illiam  de,  1346. 

Heynstrugge.  See  Hen- 
stridge. 

Heynton.  See  Hinton  St. 
George. 

Heynton,  Ivo  de,  572. 

Simon  de,  572. 


Heyrun.     See  Hayrun. 
Heywode.     See  Hawode. 
Heywulf,  Jordan,  1108. 
Hicford,  Randal  de,  177. 
Hicheman,  Richard,  394(/l. 
Hilcomlie    (Hilecumb),    186, 

383. 
Hill  (Hile   Hele),  32,  103. 
Hillecumb.  Richard  de,  506. 
Hillesbcrgh.     See  Ell)orc)ugh. 
Himingdon.     See  Hemington. 
Hinelandc,  John  de,  604. 
Walter,    his    son. 


Sprigand  de,  604. 


Hinton  (Hunton),  591. 
Hinton  (Heynton)  St.  George, 

566. 
Hipecok,  Hipekoc,  John,  907, 

1 1 58. 
Hird.     See  Hert. 
Hittokesmede.     See  Whiieox- 

mcad. 
Ho,  Hoo,  Baldwin  de,  1097. 
Thomas  de,   1423,  1427, 

1446,  1500. 

William  de,  324. 

Hocton.     See  Hutton. 
Hode,   Hudc,  Hodde,   Odilc, 

Gilbert,     173,     383,     384, 

385. 
Henry,  of  Irome,  643. 

Richard,  1463. 

Robert,  1108,  1477. 

Hodierne,     Rol)ert,    son    of, 

676. 
Hogeford,    Hokforde,    Hugh 

de,  1025. 

William  de,  1355. 

Holcoml^  (Holecumb),   489, 

690,  1099,  1448. 
Holdeland,    Hugh  dc,    1463, 

1467. 
Holedon,  Hoienden,  William 

de,  420A,  420//,  420^. 
Holeford,  268. 
Holekumb,  Holecum,  Henry 

de,  444,  607,  1448. 

Johnde,  315    383. 

Nicholas  de,  8. 

William   de,   489,    561, 

690. 

Holenham,  Robert  de,  1423, 

1427. 
Holewall,  Robert  de,  394(/). 


Holeweye,    Hale  way,    Henry 

de,  382(3^).  "63. 

Thomas  de,  668. 

Holme     (La     Houme),     co. 

Dorset,  Brother  Gregory  of, 

780. 

prior  of,  ih, 

Holne,  John  de,  1446. 

Richard  de,  423. 

Holse.     See  Halse. 

Holt,   Elias  de,  William  and 

Walter,  sons  of,  142. 
Henry  de,  117,  382(5///), 

383. 
John  de,  151 1. 

Roger  de,  382(5///). 

Thomas  le,  1472. 


Hohon  (Halton),  965,  1049. 

Holion,  Jordan  de,  382(5?'). 

Holway  (Holeweie,  Hale- 
wave,  Heleweyweye),  124, 
668. 

Hospital    of    St.    Mary 

Magdalene  in,  1525. 

Holwell  (Holewale),  201,94c. 

Thomas,     chaplain     of, 

939. 
John,      his     clerk, 

939. 
Holy  Land,  the,  302. 

Homedon.     See  Hamdon. 

HoneyM'ick  (Huncwik),  1 551. 

William,  reeve  of,  240. 

Honil)ere     (Henebir,     Huni- 

bcr'),  384,  580. 
Hoo.     See  Ho. 
Horblaweton.        See     Horn- 

blotton. 
Hordar',  Horder,  Simon,  >on 

of,  149. 

Simon  le,  221. 

Hore,  John  le,  324,  383. 

Philip  le,  1 1 30. 

Horethome  (Harethurn),  304. 
hundred  of,  385,  pp.  47, 

265. 
Horlok,  Robert,  890. 
Horn,  Aylmer,  327. 

William,  825. 

Hornblotton     (Ilorblawetc.n), 

631. 

Elyas,  parson  of,  578. 

Juliana,  his  mothtr, 

57?. 


49^ 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS   AND   PLACES. 


Ilr-mir^don,  710. 

I  lorn  maker  {Camcysur), 

Thomas  the,  604- 
IhffT.^yk,  952. 
Hoi -<  heath     (Ilorscttc),     co. 

Cambs.,  1394. 
H«»r^v  I'lgne-i-    in  Hridg water 

(P<gcn<sse).  1 1 27. 
nor«ini;lon,     348,    491,    912, 

944-  1440. 
Hor-v,  Horsi,   Emma,  wi'c  of 

William  de,  742. 

Ralph  <ie    1495. 

Will. am,         his 

brother,  1495. 

William  '!c,  :95,  1309. 


Horton,  407,  495. 
Horlon,       Richard      de     and 
Ilawise,  his  w:fe.  407. 

Rrjgtr  dc,  1477- 

Hon*ey,  William  de,  426. 

Hf-se.      .S<y  Hunc. 

H««pital,    Ralph  de,  prior  of 

Leigh,  395. 
Host,  Elia>  le,  1492. 
Ht^tcir,  (iuy  (UV/rV)  dc,  42. 
Philipixi,  his  wife, 

42. 
Hotte,  Walter.  896. 
Houca,    Peter   de  and    Jean, 

his  wife,  532. 
Hour,  Ricfiard  de,  1 1 7,  383. 
Hour.d>lK,rough  (HunilesDurg, 

Hundelxrwc),  304. 

hundred  of,  212,  p.  274. 

Houndstreet         (Hundeslerte, 

Hundesture),  208,  503. 
Il'myi,  Wnlter  df,  1 329. 

Scd  iil.o  Hywys. 
iIoy>elm,  William  le,  385. 
Hul»l)elcph.     .SV**  Uhley. 
Hul>erd    Walter,  1^82. 

William,  1244. 

HuU'ple  Were,  water  of,  843. 
Hubert,  Alice,  wife  of  Philip, 

470. 

Sybil,  769. 

Walter,  son  of,  I' ^\. 

Huckel,    Hukkel,   Jocelin,  of 

Norhtperilon,  165,  384. 
Ilude.     Seg  Hcnle. 
Hi'e,  John  de,  51. 
Hugl)el,  Jocelin,   of  Neuton. 

385. 


Hugelin,    William,     son     of, 

IC65. 
Hugh,  Henry,  soo  of,  55. 

Roi*rt,  soo  of,  56. 

Richard,  son  of,  ^20f^. 

Robert,  son  of,  92. 

Swanilda,    laic   wife  oi^ 

R«"^er,     son    of,     1 1 25, 

1287. 

William,  son  of,  6S7. 


Huish       (H)*wis,        Hcwyse, 

Hewise),  3^0,472,  539- 

manor  ^f,  1 162. 

HoLh  Episcopi  (Hjrwys),  849. 
Huleman,  Odo  de,  198. 
Hull,  Elia>  de,  989. 

Ralph  de,  225. 

William  de,  225,  383. 

William  de  la,  467. 

Hulle.     Su  Bishop's  HaU. 
Humphrey,    Henry,    soo    of, 

540. 
Nicholas,    son    of,   482, 

666,889. 

Reginald,    son   of,    4S2, 


666. 

Walter,  son  of,  666. 


Hanspill.     Sie  HimtspilL 
Hunte,  Henry,  569. 

Humphrey  le,  383. 

Kichard,  125. 

TlKxaas  Ic,  760. 

Himtere,  Humphrey  de,  II5. 
Honteworth',  Osanna  de,  94^ 
HeibcTT,    her   hus- 
band, 94. 

Walter  de,  1 1 14. 


Huncle,  William  le,  the  clerk, 

1069. 
Hundebcrwe,        Hundesburg. 

See  1 1  ounilsborough. 
Hundehevid  (near  Downhead), 

394(/). 

Hunderhil,  Peter,  1355. 

Hundest,  Walter,  990. 

Hundesterte,  Hundesture. 
See  Houndstreet. 

Hundestertb,  Hundisterth, 
John  de,  503. 

Richard  de,  503. 

Hundeston',  Milo  de,   14. 

Hundredman,  Henry  the,  604, 
1187. 

Richard  the,  761,  762. 

Simon  the,  304. 

Stephen  the,  84. 

Ilunebir,  Sweting  de,   I02. 

Ilunewic,  Waldrick  de,  24O. 

Emma,  his  wife,  240. 

Osb«rl  and  Solo- 
mon, her  br.lhers,  240. 

Hunewik.     See  Honeywick. 

Huniber.     Set  Honibere. 


Huntingdon,  133(1,  >337. 
Huntsham  (Hundscfaam),  co. 

Devon,  p.  425. 
Hunttpill  (Hunespill,  Hanes- 

Pttl*).   304t   359.  i6o.  364* 
412,    859-61,    930,    1306, 

1318,  1452, 1453,  p.  Ixxiii. 

Bememere  in,  1452. 

Saltelood  in,  ib. 

Saltemore  in,  ib. 

Lodespill  in,  ib, 

Logh^cros  in,  ib, 

Hontwonh,  in  N.    Petherton 

(Huntewnrth),   165,   1 1 16. 
Huppehnlle,    William   de,   of 

Huniber,  384,  385. 
Hurleg,  Rmndal  de,  382(5». 
Hume,  Robert  de  la,  1 192. 
Hurri,  Colin,  869. 
Huscort,  Alexander,  390. 
Huse,  Hause,    Hose,   Heose, 

Hese,  Geoffry,  750. 

Godfrey,  337. 

Henry,   319,   383.    780, 

1494. 
Hubert,  877,  1494. 

James,  750,  1038,  1494. 

John,  964. 

of     Cherlecombe, 


750. 


Matilda  de,  521. 
—  Ralph,    92,     325,     327, 
340,  383*  424.  670,   1478. 
and  Eva,   his  wife. 


424*   511 

—  Reginald,  1287. 

of  Holebrok,  974. 


Richard  le,  1075. 

Thomas,   1287. 

Walter,  382(42). 

Hutton  (Hocton),  590,  773. 
Huverfakeford,  449. 

Cp.  Fakeford  <md  Nether- 
fakeford. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PI-ACES. 


493 


Hyele.     See  Hale. 
Hyne,  Robert  le,  1 506. 
Hynton  (Hynieton,  Hyneton), 

7i3»  726. 
Hyseland,  904. 
Hywis,  Hywys.     See  Huish. 
Hywys,  Nicholas  de,  1270. 

See  also  Howys. 


I. 


Ichestoke.     See  Edstock. 

Iderneston,  William  dc,  1350. 

Ilberd,  Richard  de,  934. 

Ilchester  (Ivecestre,  Ivelces- 
tre,  Yvelcestre),  44,  115, 
148,  177,  250,  258,  304, 
3>2,  372,  373,  414.  42o(y, 
c,  zz),  567,  674,  745,  790, 
800,  905,  9ja,  965,  1024, 
III7)  1162,  1252,  1371. 
1378,  1417,  1444.    pp.    26, 

28.  134-37. 

church     of    St.    Mary, 


1253,  1255,  1264. 
—  church  of  St.  John,  1254. 
church  of  St.  John  the 


Bai^tist,  1260. 
Illeb-ri,  YUebert,  Martin,  842. 

William,  844. 

Ilminster  (Elmenibtre),  198. 

Ilton,  1 2 17. 

Imme,  Richard,  son  of,  1497. 

Thomas,  of  Wells,  82?. 

Ingelbache,  Nicholas  de,  840. 
Inglescumbe,  Robert  de,  991. 
Irgoulf,  Hfenry,  304. 
Insula.  Plugh  de,  877. 

Ralph  de,  370. 

Richard  de,  604. 

Robeit  de,  385. 

Rog«-r  de,  890. 

William   de,    583,    738, 

1249. 
son  of  Robert   de, 

654. 
Inthetune,  Am(  Id,   of  We  t- 

hache,  604. 
Ipres,    Mabel,    daughter    of 

Geoffry  de,  of  PoriD)rr,  934. 
Ireland,  87,  1 523. 

Alice  of,  747. 

Robert  de,  1287. 


Ireland,  Thomas  of,  1064. 
Irreys  (Irishman),  Henry  le, 

1 133. 

John  le,  807. 

Reeinald  le,  1317. 

Robert  the,  279. 

William  the,  85,  382(2^), 

382(50. 
Iseult,  Margery,  daughter  of, 

Ivans.  Adam,  625* 

Ivecestre,      Ivelcestre.        See 

Ilchester. 
Ivenne,  Philip  le,  604. 
Iveihom,  Margery  de,  1388. 


J. 


Janford,  a  man  of,  384. 
Japton,  Jatton.     See  Yatton. 
Jay,  Walter  le,  220. 
Jedelesworth.       See     Eding- 

worth. 
Jerdel,  Edgar  de,  572. 
Jerusalem,  prior  of  the  Hospital 

of,  10. 
Jocelin,  Matilda,  daughter  of, 

1 1 18. 
Joclenne,  William,  1 1 33. 
Joel,  Warin,  son  of,  580,   p. 

134. 
Juhn,  King  of  England,  293. 

Alexander,  son  of,  344. 

Alfred,  son  of,  1079. 

Christiana,  daughter  of, 

'505.  ,    „ 
Osbert,  son  of  38.?. 

Richard,  5 on  of,  3j6. 

Robert,  son  of,  382(51), 


479,  592.  625. 

William,    son    of,    367, 


1384. 
Jollam,  William,  496,  497. 

Roger,  his  son,  496,  497. 

Jordan,  Adam,  son   of,    397, 

663. 

Ingeleis,  son  of,  24. 

Nicholas,  son  of,    1 339, 

1341,  1353. 

Walter,  son  of,  685 

William,  son  of,  836. 


Jovene,  Adam  le,  394(r). 
Joye,  Alice,  1065. 


Juliana,  Jul*,    Hugh,  son  of, 

114. 

Roger,  son  of,  773. 

Jumieges  (Gimeges),  abbot  of, 

46. 
Jurday,  William,  1153. 


K. 

Kache.     See  Cacche. 
Kachepol,  Waller,  382(5^). 
Kack.     See  Cacche. 
Kaddeby.     See  Cadebi. 
Kade.     See  Cade. 
Kael,  Humphrey,  8. 

Thomas,  627. 

Kaherdyan,  William,  569. 
Kalemondeston,       Kalemun- 

den.     See  Calemundesden. 
Kalesion,  Philip  de,  382(51). 
Kamber.     See  Camber. 
Kamel.     See  Camel. 
Kane.     See  Kent. 
Kandcl.  Fiichard  de,  92. 
Kant  ford.     See  Kentsford. 
Kaninton,     Kantinton.       See 

Cannington. 
Kantekeshavd.  Kantokeheved, 

See  Quantockshtad. 
Kantford,  Thomas  de,  147 1. 
Kantinton',   Richard   de,   the 

cook,  155. 
Kantok,  Osbert  de.  304. 
Kanvill,  Witliam  de,  382(41). 
Kardewurth*,  Roger  de,  1420. 
Karen  ton.     See  Carhamptoa. 
Karevill.     See  Carevill. 
Kari.     See  Castle  Gary. 
Karswell.     See  Carswell. 
Karver,  Jordan  le,  1 147. 
Kat,  Richard,  1092. 
Kateby.     See  Cadebi. 
Kathangre.     See  Cathanger. 
Katicote.     See  Catcott. 
Kaumel.     See  Camel. 
Kaun.     See  Caune. 
Kausne.     See  Caune. 
Kayncsham.     See  Keynsham. 
Keel,  Thomas  le,  394(r). 
Keinton  Mandeville  (Keinton, 

Kynton),  499,  718. 
Keling,  Kelling,  John  de    p. 

440. 


494 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Keling,  Richard,  437. 
Kelveton,     John,     dean    of, 

4202Z. 
Kemmy,  Walter,  318. 
Ken.     See  Kene. 
Kenardel,  Hugh  de,  945. 
Kendale,  Thomas  de,  107. 
Kene,  Ken,  Herbert  de,  115, 

312. 

John  de,  312. 
ordan,  1295. 

Walter,  1355. 

William,  1226. 

Kenet,  Thoojas  de,  382(2^). 
Kennes,  Roger  de  and  Emma, 

his  wife,  63. 
Kent,  Kane,  Ralph  de,  806. 

Richard  de,  351. 

\\  iiliam  929. 

Kentelbergh',      Kentilesberg, 

Walter  de,  1075,  1263. 
Kentsford,    in    St.    Decuman 

(Caneford,  Kaneford),  1267. 
Kerhingbrok,  Walter  de,  899. 
Keteford,  William  de,  383. 
Ketenour,  Geoffiy  de,  636. 
Kever,  William  de,  152 1. 
Keye,  Ralph,  941. 
Keynsham,  Keynessum,  Kayne- 

sham,  304,  744,  910. 

hundred  of,  pp.  48,  260. 

Keynsham,    abbot    of,    loiti, 

489,  5»7,    561,    56^   57J» 
630,  690,  768,  964,   1000, 

1355- 
Jones,     his    cleik, 

562. 


•  Elx}rard,  his  cham- 
berlain, 1355. 

Jordan,      his      lay 

brother,  1355. 

Peter,  abbot  of,  1 46 1. 

Kideford.     See  Kittisford. 

Kideford,  Richard  de,  144 1. 

Kilmersdcn  (Kinemercdun, 
Kinmersdon,  Kynemerdon, 
Kynmarcsdun,  248,  302, 
304,  607,  987,  999. 

hundred    of,     385,    pp. 

58,  276. 

Nicholas,    chaplain    of, 

991. 

Nicholas,     his 

brother,  ib^ 


Kilmington  (Culmeton)   1521. 
Kilve  (Kylve),  668. 
Kinemaresdun.     See  K  Imcra- 

don. 
Kinewardeston.       See    King- 

weston. 
King,  Alfred  le,  of  Preston, 

864. 

Richard  le,  of  Briges, 

1456. 

Robert  le,  1 207. 

Roger,  1470. 

Stephen  le   1090. 

Thomas  le,  1064. 

Walter,  1231. 

William    le,    572,    833, 

1066. 
Kingebir*,     Kingesbir',    Isaac 

de,  869. 

Ralph  de,  498. 

Kingeston,  Kingesdon,  Kynge- 

stan,  Boeis  de,  26^. 
Ralph,   son  of   Matilda 

de,  975. 

Richard  de,  14^3,  1 177. 

Roger  de,  342. 

Simon  de,  263. 

Kingsbury    (Kingrebir*),   304, 

454,  1 1 70. 
hunared    of,     152,    170, 

P-  309. 
Kingsdon  (Kingesdon),  5,  895. 

Kingsmore,  905. 

Kingston,  near  Ilminster, 
1222. 

Kingston  Seymour  (Kinge- 
ston*), 153,  383.  962,  975. 

Kington,  Kynton,  Adam,  o' 
the  church  of,  882. 

Reginald  de,  384,  385 

Kington,  co.  Wilts.,  prioress 
of,  634. 

Kingweston  (Kinewardeston), 
617,  708,  1278. 

Henry,  parson  of,  708, 

1278. 

Kinmersdon.  See  Kilmers- 
don. 

Kinmersdon,  Michael,  son  of 
Walter  de,  997. 

Thomas  de,  990. 

Walter,  son  of  Luwin  de, 

998. 

Kippelegh,  Walter  de,  508. 


Kipping,  Reginald,  267. 

Richard,  823. 

Kitel,  William,  908. 

Kittisford  (Kideford),  1441. 

Knaplek,  Knaploke,  Knat>loc« 
Clement  de,  1 446. 

William  de,  Ti^y  ^HS- 

Knapp,  in  N.  Curry,  1270. 

Knappe.     See  Cnappe. 

Knepe.     See  Cnappe. 

KnoUe,  Philip  de,  1365. 

Richard  de,  8. 

Walter,  1246. 

Knowle  (Knolle),  1365. 

Knyte,  Mabel,  677. 

Nigel,  604. 

Koker.     See  Coker. 

Kokerre,  Kokre.     See  Coker. 

Komber,  William  le,  of  Combe, 
1175. 

Konintre,  Ralph  de,  806. 

Koo,     Robert,     bereman     of 
Bruges,  166. 

Kote.     See  Cote  and  Coat. 

Kotyn,  Hugh,  of  Yvelcesire, 
6S4. 

Koyterel.     See  Coterel. 

Krandon.     See  Crandon. 

Kriz.     See  Creech. 

Krues.     See  Crues. 

Kruke.     See  Cruke. 

Kungesbyr*.     See  Kingsbury. 

Kungesbyr*,  Eva  de,  751. 

Kurendon,  1489. 

Kurendon,  Agatha  de,  1489. 

John  de,  ib, 

Walter  de,   b. 

William  de,  ib, 

Kuri.     See  Curry. 

Kuri,  GcofTry  de,  188. 

Kusinton.     See  Cossington. 

Kylkenny,  John  de,  925. 

Kyma,  Matilda,  late  wife  of 
Simon  de,  1394. 

Kymaresdun.       See   Kilmers- 
don. 

Kynemerden,  Stephen  de,  392. 

Kynemerdon.       See   Kiluters- 
don. 

Kynewardeston.       See    King- 
weston. 

Kyng.     See  King. 

Kyngestan.     See  Kingeston. 

Kynneye,  Walter  de,  1524. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


495 


Kynton.    See  Keinton. 
Kyte,  Mabel,  589. 

Stephen,  her  father, 

589. 

Richard,  519. 

Christiana,  his  wife. 


519. 
William,  519. 

Walter,  517. 

Kytenor.     See  Cotenor. 

Kytincoe,  Thomas  de,  1430. 


L. 

La  Clyve.     See  Cleeve. 

La  Fenne,  625,  733. 

La  Forde.     See  Ford. 

La  Hanse.     See  Halse. 

La  Hole,  533. 

La  Houme.     See  Holme. 

1^  Lade.     See  Load. 

La  Leythe,  1507. 

La  Penne.     See  Penselwood. 

La  Pulle.     See  Pylle. 

La  Rade,  Rode.     See  Road. 

La  Stane.     See  Stone. 

La  Swell  (near  Bruton),  951. 

La  Waye,  $34. 

LaWyke.      See     Week    St. 

Lawrence. 
La  Yurde,  Yerde,  1360,  1367. 
Lacerton,  Gregory  de,  394(y'). 
Lacy,  Alice  de,  771. 

John,  1355. 

Lade,  John  de  la,  859. 
I^herre.     See  I^mbeth. 
Lambeth  (Lamheye,  Laherre), 

CO.  Surrey,  420^,  pp.  128, 134. 
Lam  bourn,  co.  Berkis.,  609. 
Lambro,  Adam  de,  15. 

Roger,  son  of,  15. 

Lambroc,   Lambrok',    Hugh, 

15.  17. 
Denisc,  late  wife  of, 

15.  17- 

John  de,  454.  1285. 

Raymond  de,  9. 


Rolxjrt  de,  9,  879. 

William  de.  649. 

William,   son  of  Walter 

de,   I171. 
Lambrook  (Lambrok'),  9,  454, 

I17X. 


Lameth,  Lameyet,  Lamette. 
See  Lamyatt. 

Lamieton.     See  Lamyatt. 

Lamport.     See  Langport. 

Lampreye,  Agnes,  servant  of 
Lucy,  810. 

Lamyatt  (Lamieton,  Lamye- 
tun,  Lamette,  I^meth, 
Lameyet,  Lamyette),  329, 
333.  394(/>),  569*  609,  673, 
1376,  1395- 

Lamyetta,     Lanyiete,     Lany- 

yette,  Aubert  de,  333,  438. 
Christiana,  his  wife, 

333. 
John  de,  394/ 

Lamyette.     See  Lamyatt. 

Lancecumbe,  Henry  de,  1219. 

Lanceleve,  Robert,  984. 

Landsare,  Gilbert  de  la,  458. 

Lane,  John  de  la,  604. 

Robert  de  la,  875. 

Lange,  Walter  de,  790. 

Langebrok,   Langebrug,  John 

de,  502. 

William  de,  490. 

Langebrug.     See  Langridge. 

Langcford,        Richard       de, 

394(>f').  507.  510.  555»  814, 

929,  990,  p.  137. 

Roljert  de,  679. 

Matilda,  his  mother, 

679. 
Roger     de,      382(411), 

394(0. 
William    de,   611,    635, 


679.  1305.  1324. 
Matilda, 


his   wife, 

1305. 
Langeland,    Langelonde, 

Thomas    de,     569,      1309, 

Langeleg,  Langelegh,  Geoffry 

de,  601,  730. 

of  Cusington,  889. 

Langerig.  See  Langridge. 
Langtton,  Henry  de,  420^. 
Langfuid      Bud  vile,      manor, 

pp.  121 1,  1212. 
Nicholas,    chaplain     of, 

p.  1212. 
Langford,  in  Churchill,  420/, 

595.   679,  686.  928.   1282, 

1288,  1305,  1324,  X465. 


Langhas,  Richard  de,  1356. 
Langport  (Lamport),  304,  373, 

903.  921,  923.  1049- 

burgh  of,  264,  p.  261. 

Langport,   Lawrence   de    and 

Christiana,  his  wife,  373. 

Roger  de,  1435. 

Langridge  (Langebrug, 

Langerig),  337,  502. 
William   reeve  of,  337. 


—  —  1    %/«/# 

Lanteglos,  co.  Cornwall,  1415. 

Lanlhony  (Lanton),  co. 
Gloucester,  John,  prior  ol. 
706,  707. 

Lanyiete,  Lanyyette.  Sec 
Lamyetta. 

Lapene.     See  Lopene. 

Laplache,  Cecily,  fate  wife  o\ 
Hugh  de,  1356. 

Lapse,  Ralph  de,  729. 

Julia,  his  mother,729. 

Edith,  his  aunt,  729. 

Daniel,  his  grand- 
father, 729. 

Lapse,     ^ee  Apse. 

Ijistoke.     See  S'oke. 

Lateran  Council,  the,  p.  27. 

Launceston,  co.  Cornwall, 
p.  2. 

Launclevec,  Lancevel^e, 
Robert,  506,  510. 

Laure,  Adam,  267. 

Laurton.    See  Laverton. 

Lauval,  Henry,  1 447. 

Peter,  90:8. 

Lfcuwerton.     See  Laverton. 

Laveles.     See  I^veles. 

I^averton  (Laurton),  1508. 

Laverton,  Lawerton,  Lawor- 
ton,  Laurton,  Lauwerton, 
Geoffry  de,  394(/>),  421, 
422,  424,  425,  545.  587, 
628,  ICX>I. 

Amabel,  his  wife, 

628. 
La  ware,  Jordan,  608. 
Lawayle,  Geoffry,  of  Bruton, 

953- 
Lawe,  Ralph,  1452. 
Lawerton,     Laworton.       See 

Laverton. 
Lazur,  Thomas  de,  1508. 
Le  Marcis  (in  Marston  Bigot), 

394('*). 


496 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Lecheswuithe»  Custance,  late 
wife  of  William  de,  1358. 

Ledderlord,  Walter  de,  941. 

Ledingburgh.     ^S**^  Lenburgh. 

Lcdscde,  Richard  de,  382(4/). 

Leech,  Richard  the,  955. 

Lefchild,  Nicholas,  son  of,  of 
Cheriton,  967. 

Legegod,  Leggegode,  Thomas, 
226. 

William,  476. 

Legge.     See  Legh. 

Legh,  la  Leg',  Lega,  Legge, 
la  Leye,  Adam  de,  and 
Agnes,  his  wife,  1 2 18. 

Agnes,  wife  of  Maurice 

ue,  504,  553.        ^       ^   ^ 
Henr>,  her  father, 


553. 

—  Alice,  wife  of  Martin  de, 

480. 

—  Christiana,  late  wife  of 
Robert  de,  642,  726. 

Maurice,  her    son, 


642. 
John  de,  122,   130,  383, 

385, 1212. 
Martin     de,    512,    703, 

1287,  1440.  1456- 

Maurice  de,  553,  ^45. 

and     Agnes,     his 

wife,  553. 

Pettrr  de   and  Philip,  his 

trother,  1 218. 

Reginald  de,  122,   130, 

383,  811. 

Richard  de  la,  1022. 

Robert  de,  8. 

knt.,  132. 

son  of  John  de  926. 

Richard,  his   bro- 


ther, ib. 
of  the  abbot  of  St. 

Augustin    "Abbot's   Leigh), 

962. 

Roger  de,  82,  1446. 

Thomas  de,  1 131. 

the  chaplain,  628. 

William  de,  322,  383. 

Legh.     See  Leigh. 

Legh,  prior  of.     See  Cannon- 

leigh. 
Legh  ton.     See  Ixighton. 
Leghermore,  in  I^ngport,  903. 


Lehyton.     See  Leighton. 

Leigh  (Legh),  322,  351,  727. 

Leighton  (Lehyton),  425,  7cx>. 

Lekeworth,  Lekeswurth, 
Lokesworth,  Alice  de,  and 
Matilda,  her  sister,  84. 

Constance,    late  wife  of 

William    de,     1313,     1 32 1, 


'329. 


Richard,  her  son. 


See      \jc\- 


'3'^ 
Lekkes  worthy. 

worthy. 

Leminton.     See  Limington. 

Lenborough  (Ledingburgh), 
CO.  Buck.,  1392. 

I^ng.     See  Lyng. 

Lengleis.     See  Engleys. 

Lent,  Alured  de,  38212;!). 

Lepenne.     See  Penselwov^. 

Leu,  John  le,  1328. 

Leucenay,  Leucncenay,  Wil- 
liam de,  1298,  1299,  1308. 

Leude,  Hugh,  1214. 

Leundi,  l^lph,  of  Waundestre, 
1030. 

Matilda,  his  daugh- 
ter, ib. 

Agnes,  his  wife,  ib. 

Leveies,  Laveles,  Adam,  266, 

383. 
Richard,   his    son, 

266.  383. 

Levething,  Tohn,  276. 

the  Harper,  213. 

Levine,  John,  805. 

Lewes,  co.  Sussex,  4201,  1 354, 

1394. 
Lexington,  Lexinton,  Richard 

tie,  394. 
Robert    de,    871,    896, 

965;  'I59»  pp.   134,  135.  P- 
>xxix. 

Lex  worthy  (Lekt  worth,  Lek- 
kesworthy,  Lokesworth), 
1456,  1523. 

Leye.     See  Legh. 

Leylolt,  Robert,  1 287. 

Libenesse,  330. 

Libenesse,  Robert  de,  330. 

Liberdy,  William,  360. 

Lichfield,  1 334. 

Liddon,  Liddon  in  Bruneland, 
Adam  de,  452,  471. 


Lideford,      John      de       and 

Matilda,  his  wife,  713,  726. 
Lidiard,  Lidyard.      See  Lyd- 

eard. 
Lihenhors,  Henry  de,  1222. 
Lihtfot,  Henry,  164. 
Lilie,  Robert,  1144. 
Lillisdon,     in     North     Curry 

(Lillesdon),  172,  383. 
Limington  (Lemington,  Lym- 

.ington),  391,  393,  1042. 
Limington,  Geoffry  de,  1042. 

William  the  cook  of,  564, 

Limpelsham.        See      Lymp- 

sham. 
Lince,       Richard,     son       of 

Matthew  de,  452. 
Lincoln,  p.  25. 

county  of,  1 285. 

Lord  Bishop  of,  p.  25. 

Margaret,    countess    of, 

1394. 
Lincoln,  Alfred  de,  990. 
Brun,   his   servant, 

ib. 
Linde,    Robert    de    la,    576, 

1219. 

Lindesie ,  371. 

Lingnire,  William  de,  310. 
Linham,  214. 

Linham,  Alexander  de,  1020. 
Linoys,  John,  591. 
Lintemere,   William  de,    382 

Linton,  Walter  de,  420W. 
William,     chaplain     of, 

961. 
Linus,  John  de,  918. 
Lipehet,  John  de,  831. 
Liscombe  (Loscumb.  Losharo, 

Luscum),  1423,  1427. 
Lissewis,  Alexander  de,  383. 
Liiecrost,  Richard,  144. 
Litelcantekeshaved.      See 

Quantockshead,  Little. 
Litlecote,  Robert  de,  4201. 
Litleton,  Litlenton,  Lutleton, 

Colin  de,  478,  1272. 
Michael,  son  of  Reginald 

de,  622. 
Nicholas  de,  394(/),  438, 

1440. 

Robert,  son  of  William 


de,  1280. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


497 


Litleton,  conid,,   Robert    de, 
8 1 8,  667. 

Roesia  de,  710. 

Walter  de»  667. 

William  de,  304,  382(/). 

Litstoke»  Robert  de,  604. 
Little  {U  Petit),  Robert  the, 

385. 
William  the,  425. 

Little  Moor  (Litlemore),  1454. 

Littleton  (Litleton),  1471. 

Load  (La  Lade),  1454. 

Loderford,  Walter  de,  659. 

Loders   (Lodres),  co.  Dorset, 

706,  707. 
Lof,  Hugh,  166. 
lx)ghton  p  Lufton],  403. 
Lokebergh,  Ivo  de,  1131. 
Lokesworth.    See  Lekeswurth 

and  Lexworthy. 
Lokinton.     See  Luckington. 
Lolling,  Richard,  248. 
Lond',  Adam  de,  460. 

Maurice  le,  I433. 

Richard  de,  1482. 

Robert  de,  1348. 

Thomas  de,  382(310). 

London,  Tower  of,  511,  585, 

665,  1347,  1376. 
Long,  Hugh,  240,  1 151. 

John,  1436,  1439. 

Philip,  382(50. 

Thomas,  596,  877. 

William,  520. 

of  Bristol,  910. 

Long  Ashton  (Aston),  926. 
Ix)pene,    Lapene,   Adam    de, 

1268. 

Nicholas  de,  1463,  1477. 

Loscumb.     See  Liscombe. 
Losham.     See  Liscombe. 
Lost,   Walter,   of  Caldekote, 

45'- 
Lote,  Ralph,  382(3/). 

Lottesham,     Blakeman      de, 

1020. 
Love,  John,  498,  921. 
and   Isabella,  his 

wife,  454- 
Lovel.    See  Luvel. 
Luccumbe,    Luckumb,    Luk- 

kumb,  Locumb,  Geoffry  de, 

383. 
John  de,  496,  497. 


Luccumbe,  etc. ,  Philip  dc,  496. 

Robert  de,  103. 

Simon  de,  12x0. 

William  de,  383. 

Luckington    (Lokmton),    26, 

328,  1444. 
Lucyen,  Philip,  1394,  1396. 
Lud,  Lude,  Henry,  1454. 
and  Justina,   his 

wife,  456. 

Osbert,  572. 

Petronilia  de,  1054. 

Robert  de  la,  309. 

John,  his  son,  309. 

-*  John,  his  grandson, 


309- 


and  Avice,  his  wife. 


457. 


Roger  de  la,  68a 

Idonea,    his    wife, 

and  Amice,  her  sister,  680. 
—  Thomas       de     la     and 


Amice,  his  wife,  581,  582, 
635,  680. 

Warin  de,  309. 


Ludehegh,  Henry  de,  1222. 
Ludeton,  W.  de,  1 149. 
Lug,  Hugh,  140. 

Walter,  757. 

of  la  Qive,  872. 

Lugedon,  Richard  le,  382(4x). 
Luke,  Nicholas,  son  of,  11 98. 
Lumene,  Lumeny,  Adam  de, 
1285. 

William  de,  472. 

Lund,    Stephen     de,     1307, 

1325. 
Lundi,  Robert,  382(2/;/). 

Lunesheft,  Luneschaft,  Henry, 

518. 

Luke  de,  449,  450, 

Luneton,  Thomas  de,  13a 
Lung,  Hugh  le  and  Gunhilda, 

his  wife,  1465. 

Reginald  le,  1463,  1467. 

Richard  le,  I02J. 

Lungeland,  Thomas  de,  541. 
Lungespey,  John,  1200. 

William  de,  1199,  1267. 

Lupe,  John  de  la,  1084. 
Thomas  de  la,  of  Ake, 

1084. 
Luscum.     See  Liscombe. 
Lussier,  William,  505. 


Luterel,  Andrew,  603,  1303, 

1311,  1330. 
Lutleton.     See  Litleton. 
Luvel,      Lovel,      Christiana, 

13631     i37if    1372,    1416, 
141 7,  1463,  1492. 

Richard,  6,  52, 346, 383, 

1363.    1371.     1372,    1416, 
1417,    1453.     M76,    1483 
1515. 

Alice,  wife  of,  1528. 


Robert,  808. 

Roger,  352,  621,  1521. 

Luvelece,  Edith,  1062. 

Sabina,      her 

daughter,  ib. 
Luveni,     Luveny,    Alexander 

de,  8,  1 141,  1286. 

William  de,  569. 

Luvering,  Walter,  1055. 
Lychet   (LycheO»  co.  Dorset, 

1330. 
Lydeard  (Lidiard),  285,  304. 

hundred  of,  pp.  27,  38. 

Lydeyard.     See  Lydiard. 
Lydford,  895. 

chaplain  of,   John,  ser- 
vant of,  896. 
Lydford,  West  (WesUudeford), 

606. 
Lydiard,  Lidiard,   Lydeyard, 

Ralph  de,  247,  pp.  26-28. 

Richard  de,  i  X04. 

Lymington.  See  Limington. 
Lympluim  (Linpelesham)  272. 
Lyng  (Lenge),  luanor  of,  164, 

383,  1 1 29. 
Lysewes,  Alexander  de,  3x5. 
Lysun,  John  de,  1025. 


M. 

Mabel,  William,  son  of,  845. 
Macecrer,  Roger  le,  569. 
Magne,  Mangne,  John,  1013. 

William,  1015. 

Magod,  Maugod,  Ralph,  530, 

1273- 
Richard,  1273. 

Maiden    Bradley    (Bradlegh), 

1521. 

Maidens,  Geoffry,  267. 


3  s 


498 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Maicr,  William  le,  of  Cran, 

773- 
Maireward.     See  Malreward. 

Makercl,  Herlxjrt,  904. 

Walter,  1 1 10. 

Malecumb,  Geoffry  de,  100. 

Malei,    Lucy,    394^,    394(^), 

577,  604,  613,  665,  1270. 

Ralph,  3«2(3J). 

William,  324,  383,  395, 

411,421,  510,  1456. 
Maleysel,   MaloyseU,    Henry, 

420,  761. 
Malherl)e,    Henry,   478,  571, 

667. 

John  le,  382(30. 

Robert,  394/».  422,  424. 

665. 

William.  394(/). 


Malivel,  Roger,  36i8,  383. 

Mallo,  Malo  Lacu,  Peter  de, 

177     218,    225,    265,    276, 

293. 
Maloyscll.     See  Maleysel. 

Malreward,     Maireward, 

Maurcward,  Geoffry,  61 1. 

John,  394(1). 

Philip,  760-2. 

Thomas.  760-2. 

William,      115, 


289, 
293. 


394(/),  908. 
Maltravers,        John, 

382(5v). 
John,  his  father,  293. 

Roger,  382(sy). 

Thomas,  394/'. 

Walter,  293, 

William,  293,  382(3^). 


Mamus,  William  de,  545. 

Mandehull.     See  Mandeville. 

Mandeville,  Maundeville, 

Mandehull,  Geoffry  de, 
541,  560,  620.  629,  650, 
7i7»  718,  739,  981,  1054, 
I375»  1386,  1405,  1429, 
1481. 

Robert,  his  £&ther, 

620. 

Helcwisa,    late    wife    of 


Thomas,   420/,   4202,   528, 
629,  981. 

—  John  de,  435. 

—  Robert    de,    420a,    499, 
594^. 


de. 


Mandeville,  Stephen  de,  499. 

William  de,  499. 

Maneston,  John  de,  92. 
Mangne.     See  Magne. 
Maperton,  379. 
Mara,    la    Mare,     Elias 
1521. 

Henry  de,  424,  468. 

Hugh  de.  382(4r). 

Peter     de,     709,    loao, 

I343»     1349.     13631    1440, 
1472. 

Nicholas  de,  382(2.t). 

Richard  de,  382(2:r). 

Roger,  356. 


See  also  Mere. 
Mardey,  Agnes,   daughter   of 

Roger,  1 169. 
Marefeld.     See  Merefeud. 
Marescall,     Mariscall.        See 

Marshall. 
Marescallus.     See  Marshall. 
Mareys,    Maris,    Geoffry    de, 

1014. 

William,  461,  981. 

Mariot,  Walter,  son  of,  666. 
Mariota,  Edith,  daughter  of, 

1052. 
Maris.     See  Mareys. 
Marisco,    Angodus     de,     36, 

37. 
Henry  de,  56. 

Herman  de,  130. 

iohn  de,  869. 
ordan,   441,   509,    521, 
523,  623. 

Peter  de,  677. 

Thomas  de,    290,    513, 


631,  656,  677,  962,  1063. 

—  Richard  de,  412. 

—  Robert    de,     368,    441, 
509,  1063,  1363. 

—  Roger  de,  1309,  1315. 

—  Walter  de,  424. 

—  William   de,    102,    3 10, 

383.    359,    364.    567,    845, 
857,  1452,  1453- 

of  Camel,  959. 

son  of  Jordan,  9S4. 


Mark  (Merk),  567,  842. 
Marksbury    (Markbyr*),    503, 

919. 
Marlborough,   co.   Wilts.,   p. 

426. 


Marleberg,  William  de,  537. 
Marscal.     See  Marshall. 
Marsh  (Merche,  Merse),  278, 

423. 
Marshall,  Marescall,  Mariscall, 

Marscal,  Marescallus,  Earl, 

'394.  ,   ^ 
Gilbert,    Earl    of   Pem- 

broke,  566. 

Henry  le,  394(7). 

John,  382(iw),  490,  657. 

of  Demeberg,  688. 

Richard,  9. 

Robert,      492,      394(<»)f 


889. 


of    Hamington, 


591 


Thomas  le,  394i^. 

Walter,  1458. 

William,  690,  984,  X314, 


1463,  1479- 

of  Berghes,  424. 


William,  Earl  of  Pem- 
broke, 330. 

Marshe,  Merse,  Margery, 
wife  of  Stephen  de  la,  1237, 
1242. 

Philip  de  la,  452. 

Thomas  de  la,  452. 

Marston,  394(A),  531. 

Marston  Bipot,  1433. 

Marston,  Little,  1464. 

Mart,  John,  parson  of  Aure, 
1026. 

Martell,  Thomas,  434. 

Martin,  Adam,  sod  of,  569. 

Mabel,      late     wife    of 

Robert,  1 286,  1286a,  1 296. 

Nicholas,    son    of,   9(S4, 


1045. 


if>. 


Henry,  his  brother. 


Robert,  1206. 
Thomas,  1497. 


Martock  (Merkestok,  Mertok), 

304,  413,  1064,  1066. 
hundred  of,   385,   1225, 

pp.  57,  291. 
Materdon,    William    de    and 

Cecily,  his  wife,  1340. 
Matilda,   Bona,    daughter  of» 

611. 

Godfrey,  son  of,  328. 

Richard*  son  of,  674. 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


499 


Matilda,  Robert,  son  of,  1309, 

1316.  1333. 

Waller,  son  of,  769. 

Matilda  the  Empress,  904. 
Osa,    her    bather 

{/oxtrix),  ib, 
Matthew,    Herbert,    son    of, 

799,   800,   861.    930,   968, 

p.  13. 
Isabella,     daughter     of, 

845. 

Simon,  788. 


Maubaunc,  William,  425,  510, 

668,  1 149. 
Mauger,  Geoffry,  son  of,  84. 
Maundeville.        See     Mande- 

ville. 
Mauniel,  Richard,  666. 
Maunsel,  Roger,  1 128. 

William,  1283. 

Maupudre,    Denise,   lale  wife 

of  John.  353. 
Maureward.     See  Malreward. 
Maurice,     Thomas,     son     of, 

565. 
Mautravers.     See  Maltravers. 
Mauveys,  William  le,  1346. 
Maviel,  Richard,  682. 
Mawere,    Mowere,   John    le, 

139,  383- 
May,   Richard  le,  of  Yatton, 

762. 
Maydenwell,  1205. 
Maynard,    Juliana,    daughter 

of^  1243. 
Maynel,  William,  861. 
Mazun,  Mazan,  Gunilda,  late 

wife  of  David  le,  912. 
Herbert    le   and   Iseult, 

his  wife,  537,  586. 

Richard  le,  572. 

and   Margery,  his 


wife,  421,  1428 
Meclefrayn,  William,  1091. 
Medic',  John.  83. 
Meifill,  Robert  de,  394(<?). 
Meirige,  Jordan  de,  68. 
Meisy,  Mersy,  Mesv,  Agatha 

de,  436,  1473,  1484. 

Geoffry  de,  84,  loi. 

Melcombe      Paulct,     in      N. 

Petherton  (Milecumbc, 

Mellecuml)e),  1 1 16,  1 195. 
Melc,  Robert  de,  394(A). 


Melebum.     See  Milborne. 

Meles,  Elias  de,  304. 

Robert,  996. 

Meleslegh,  Rosamund  de,  571. 

Melksop,  Rol)crt,  328. 

Mellens,  Melnes.     See  Mells. 

Melles,  Melne-,  John  de,  322, 
1025. 

Samuel  de,  1013,   1015, 

1017,  1025. 

Mells  (Melles,  Melnes,  Mel- 
Jens),  274,  276,    277,    385, 

3941/).  419,  552.  587*  999, 
1024. 

hundred     of,     pp.    27, 

284. 

Osbert,  reeve  of,  820. 


Membri,  Richard  de,  69. 

Mendip(Mendep',  Munedepe), 
108,  150,  826. 

Menekeselver.        .9^*^    Monk- 
silver. 

Menge,  Ranulf,  1 248. 

Menigne,  Robert  de,  394(/). 

Mercer,  Thomas  the,  666. 

Mercez,  Walter  de,  1 187. 

Merch.     See  Merk. 

Merchant,    Herbert     the,    of 
Dunster,  1150. 

Mere,  Gin)ert  de,  1007. 

Henry  de,  604. 

John  de,  604. 

Robert  de,  604*  1 182. 

Osbert,  his  brother, 

604. 

Roger  de,  604,  1 182. 

-  son  of  Richard  de, 


503- 
Thomas  de,  1425. 

Walter  de,  604. 

William  de,  322. 

See  also  Mare. 
Merefeud,     Meresfeld,    Mare- 

feld,  Alvred  de,  1355. 

Payn  de,  1355. 

Walter  de,  799. 

Meriet,     Meriette,     Merisete, 

Mervet,    Moriet,    Nicholas 

de,  8,  382(2^),  420^,  420W, 

472,    587,    723.  929,  1091, 

1268. 
Joan,  his  wife,  42qf, 

420W. 
Richard  de,  863. 


Meriet,   etc.,   Ralph  de,   132, 

510,  587.  627,  864. 
Merk.     See  Mark. 
Merk,  Merch,  Merik,  Arnold 

de,  604. 

Fulk  de,  355,  383. 

Avelina,    wife    of, 

420a,  420/. 

Richard,  604. 

William  le,  604. 


Merkesbir',  Richard  de,  1482. 
Merkestok.     See  Martock. 
Merland,  Eudo  de,  702,  704. 
Robert  de,  394(A),  702, 

704. 
Merlince.     See  Moorlinch. 
Merriott    (Meriet),    24,    217, 

219,  385. 
Merse.     See  Marsh. 
Merston.     See  Marston. 
Mersy.     See  Meisy. 
Mertok.     See  Martock. 
Merton,  prior  of,  964. 
Merttoke,  Eustace  de,  1065. 
Messager.     .SV^  Messenger. 
Messenger,  Messager,  John  le, 

1327. 
Michael  le,  1488, 

Robert  the,  146 1. 

Walter  le,  1065. 

Messer,  Geof&y  the,  of  Legh 

1151. 

John  le,  1506. 

Philip  le,  1506. 

Richard  le,  1355. 

Stephen  le,  1479. 

William  the,  771,  1515. 

Mesy.     See  Meisy. 
Metlefrem,  William,  420m. 
Meulesburee,  William  de,  53. 
Meweye,  William  de,  866. 
Michael,       Michel,       Mikel, 

Amabel,     445,    468,    482, 

1038. 
Amice,     late     wife     of 

Humphrey,  601,  640,  666, 

Colin,  683,  685. 

Gilbert,  468,  491. 

Giles,  747. 

Humphrey,  537,  684. 

John,  son  of,  424,  696. 

Nicholas,  son  of,  684. 

Nicholas,  468,  533, 1440, 


1478. 


5c» 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Michael,      contd.^       Robert, 

382(2>6). 
Stephen  and  Sarah,   his 

wife,  557,  583,  >378. 

William,    382(>6),    1484, 


1485. 

Middelsowey.    See  Middlezoy. 
Middelton.     Sec  Milton. 
Middlecote  (Middelkote),  725. 
Middleton,  Middeldon,  Midil- 

ton,    Midlutton,  Adam  de, 

472. 

Agatha,  331,  349. 

James  de,  10 19. 

Richard    de    and   Gun- 

nilda,  his  wife,  474. 

Ralph  de,  472. 

Robert  de,  373»  7i2,  990. 

William    de,   331,   332, 


472. 
Middlezoy  (Middelsowey, 

Middle  Sowy),  414,  1351. 
Midelsowy,  John,  1 1 17. 

Iseult,  his  wife,  ih. 

Midiford.     See  Mudiford. 
Mikel.     See  Michael. 
Milbome      Port      (Nfileburn, 

Melebum,  Mulebum),  206, 

207,    304.    385.   484.    584. 
666,  684. 

burgh  of,  1 283.  p.  48. 

manor  of,  p.  268. 

Milebum,    Millebum,    Henry 

de,  724,  867. 
Cecily,      wife      of, 

867. 
Milecumbe.      See    Melcombe 

Paulet. 
Mill,  Jollin  of  the,  455. 
Millebum.     Ste  Milebum. 
Millecumbe,  Milecumbe, 

Laurence  de,  1 195. 
Wymarka,  his 

daughter,  A. 

Roger  de,  11 16. 


Millecumbe    (in     Kilmersdon 

hund.),  985. 
Miller,  Adam  the,  92,  1099. 
Alfred  the,  of  Bradcford, 

1086. 

{tnudtier)^  Edward  the, 


604. 

—  Geoffry  the,  1 207. 

of  Were,  856. 


Miller,  Gilbert  the,  1041. 

of  Bekinton,  214. 

of  Wyke,  416. 

Henry  the,  of  Boimul'n, 

262. 

John  the,  604. 

{muHer),    Herbert    the, 


863. 

Hugh    the,     168,    702, 


704. 


of  Clive,  1 151. 

—  Osbert,   son  of  Maurice 
the,  of  Ludewell,  1024. 

—  Peter  the,  1099. 

—  Ralph  the,  84. 

—  Robert  the,  86. 
of  Middleton,  231, 


383-5. 


Robert ,  his  son ,  23 1 . 

Walter  the,  304. 

William  the,  912. 

little  and  Margery, 

his  wife,  1 108. 
Millers,    Mulers,    Agnes    de, 

570,  599. 
Milton  (Middelton),  231,  243, 

331.  347. 
Milverton,     115,     124,    304, 

1213,  1214. 

hundred  of,  385,  pp.  30, 

315. 

manor  of,  pp.  316,  317. 


See  also  Wynerton. 
Milverton,  Herman  de,  121 5. 

Thomas  de,  1095. 

Minchin  Buckland  (Bocland), 

prior  of,  472,  539. 

prioress  of,  634,  1474. 

Mire,  John   le   and   Matilda, 

his  wife,  488. 
Miridon,  Adam  de,  1 187. 
Modeslegh,     John    de,    567, 

854. 
Mogge,  Thomas,  1477. 
Mohun,    Moiun,    Moun,  Mo 

yun,  Moyn,  Joel  del,  8. 

John  le,  1502. 

Moke  .  .  .   ,  Ralph,  691. 
Mokcsham,  Adam,  1494. 
Molendinis,  John  de,  1 338. 
Moles,    Molis,    Nicholas    de, 

394(»,  1048,  1050. 
Hawise,   wife    of, 

1048. 


Molton,  CO.  Devon,  p.  425- 
Molton',  Edith  de.  85. 
Monasterio,  Adam  de,  572. 
Robert  de  and  Matilda, 

his  wife,  314. 
Moncell,  Hilary  de,  625. 

See  Munceaux. 
Monckton,  Munketon,  Agnes 

de,  455- 

Baldwin  de,  1 1 45. 

Roger  de,  ^04. 

William    the    reeve  of, 

IMS- 
Monec,  Walter  le,  806. 

Monelithe,  Robert,  of  Wthton, 

1 1 39. 
Monhill,  330. 
Monksilver       (Menekeselver, 

Selver),  1167,  1380. 

manor  of,  p.  308. 

Monkton  (Mulketon),   manor 

of,  1 196. 

West,  1378. 

Montacute  {Monte  Aculo),  369, 

405,  610. 

burgh  of,  p.  33,  304. 

manor  of,  p.  290. 

Montacute,    prior    of,    1266, 

1293,    1415,    1421,     1445. 

1501,  1504. 
William,  the  miller   of, 

1057. 
Montague,  Monte  Acuto,  John 

de,  32,  50,  382(4^),  534. 
Isabella,  mother  of, 

32- 


Katherine  de,  428,  534, 
1038,  1088,  1091. 

Lucy  de,  394a,  428,  440, 


534»  653. 

—  Roesia  de,  6ia 

William  de,  317,  394«, 


584,  945»974,  "89,  1516. 
Monte,  Benedict  de,  1 2 16. 

Hugh  de,  330. 

Monte,  Reginald  de,  472. 
Monte  Acuto.    See  Montague. 
Monteforti,    Munford,    Mun- 

fort,    Alexander    de,    425, 

671,  839,  995-97,  1038, 

p.  449. 
Henry  de,  1033,  1297, 

1298,  1299,  1308,  1314, 

1325,  144a 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


501 


Montcfortij^r.,  Patiickde,  724. 

Monlesorel.     See  Munsorel. 

Montfriard,  Roger  de,  394^^. 

Moorlinch  (Merlince,  Mure- 
lente,  Murilinch),  30,  31, 
601,  666. 

William,       parson      of, 

411. 

Mop,  Henry,  163. 

Mordon,  Mordune.  5^^  Mor- 
ton. 

More,  Adam  de  la,  260. 

Radinda,  his  wife,  260. 

Geoffry  de,  510,  689. 

Godfrey  de,  1 126. 

Henry  de,  759. 

Richard  de,  759. 

Martin  de  la,  173. 

Robert,  his  brother, 

173- 

Stephen  de,  359. 

William  de,  3. 

Agnes,  wife  of,  3. 


Morel,  Ralph,  1 190. 
Moreton,     See  Mortain. 
Moretonig.     See  Mortin. 
Moreville,  Richard  de,  706. 
Morice,  John,  1 175. 
Moriet.     See  Meriet. 
Morin.  Morvn,  Benedict,  1218, 

1223,  1283. 

John,  728,  1284. 

Ralph,  p.  3. 

William,  4202;. 

Morland,  Edith  de  la,  1442. 

William  de  la,  I442. 

Morle^,  Ricliard  de,  299. 
Mortam      (Moreton),     John, 

count  of,  afterwards  King  of 

England,  293. 
Mortin,    Moretonig,    William 

de,  ?43»  382(3^). 
Morton,  co.  Devon,  p.  425. 
Morton,    Mordon,    Mordune, 

Mortune,  Adam  de,  18,  40, 

78. 

Adam  de,  Matilda,  wife 

of,  18,  40,  78. 

Richard  de,  430. 

Simon    de    and    Diana, 


Mortuo    Mari,    Agatha,    late 
wife  of  Robert,  1 184. 

Roger  de  and  Matilda, 

his  wife,  1 394,  1 396. 

Moser,  Walter  le,  1310   131 1. 

Motun,  Geoffry,  321. 

Moun,  John  de  and  Joan,  his 

wife,  1394- 
Reginald   de,  395,   452, 

624,  Ii37,ii49»  1394, 1457. 
1498. 
Isabella,   wife   of, 

1394. 
Richard,  299. 

William  de,  593. 

See  Mohun. 
Mowere.     See  Mawere. 
Moyn,  Moyun.     See  Mohun. 
Muceaus.     See  Munceaux. 
Mucegros,    Muchegros,    Mu- 

cengros,  Richard  de,  394(^)1 

491 »  533.  546. 

Margery,      his 

mother,  533. 

of   Sandercumbe, 

1082. 

Robert  de,  382(2/),  974, 


his  wife,  1445. 
—  Thomas  de,  425.  706. 
William  de,  706. 


Mortuer.     See  Murtry. 


1 189. 
Muchelney,  149s* 

abbey  of,  718. 

John,  abbot  of,  1495. 

Mudeford,    Midiford,    Henry 

de,  378,  382(«). 

Therric  de,  84,  loi. 

Mudesle,    Blissotta,   daughter 

of  Alexander,  667. 
Mudford  (Mudiford),  278,  588. 
Muleburn.     See  Millwrne. 
Mulers.     See  Millers. 
Muleton,     Thomas    de,    pp. 

'34,  135- 
MuUent,  Robert  de,  1249. 

Mulshangre,      Clement      de, 

1446. 

William  de,  1446. 

Munceaux,  Muceaus,  William 

de,  1490. 

See  Moncell. 
Munedepe.     See  Mendip. 
Munemue,  Cecily  de,  1075. 
Muner.     See  Miller. 
Munfort.     See  Monteforti. 
Munjoye,  Elias,  de  la  Se,  1 185. 
Munketon.     See  Monckton. 


Munsorel,   Montesorcl,  Munt- 
sorel,  Hugh  de,  619. 

Lucy,    his  wife, 

619. 

James  de,  375,  864. 

Ralph  de,    394(2).   498, 


570,  572,  599i  1182,  1 187. 

Richard  de,  1189,  1269. 

Murelentc.  See  Moorlinch. 
Murilinch.  See  Moorlinch. 
Murtry  in  Buck  land  Dinham 

(Mortuer),  988. 
Musard,  Ralph,  p.  135. 
Musbanck,  John,  964. 
Myridun,  Myriden,  Adam  de, 

604. 
Philip  de,  604. 


N. 

Nappere,  Reginald  le,  232. 
Np.ptone,  William  de,  1330. 
Navr.     See  tieyr. 
Neath  (Neth),  abbot  of,  547, 

631. 
Emald,    his    lay 

brother,  547. 
monks  of,  1 133. 


Nempnet  (Trubewel),  27. 
Nereberd,    Nerebere,     Henry 

de,  382(2). 

Philip  de,  713. 

Neth.     See  Neath. 
Nethercote,  548,  1286. 
Nethercote,  Richard  de,  130. 

William  de,  130. 

Netherfakeford,  449. 

C/>.  Fakeford. 
Netherford,  John  de,  941. 
Netherham,  1 178. 
Nettlecombe,  manor  of^  IISS- 
Neuport,    William    de,    and 

Alice,  his  wife,  401. 
Neuton,  Robert  de,  420^,  4209. 

Walter  de,  394/1. 

Neutor   Robert  de,  1 291. 
Neville,  John  de,  1 241. 
Newecomen,  Walter,  369. 
Newenton.     See  Newton. 
Newman,  John  le,  917. 

John,  of  Sutton,  899. 

Roger  le,  1203. 

William  le,  719. 


502 


INDEX   OF  PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Newn,  John  le,  of  Wuhtton, 

882. 
Newport    Pagnell,    pp.    349, 

350- 
Newton,  Nicholas  de,  917. 

Newton  (Newenton),  159, 164, 

I6S,  383,  807. 
fishponds  of,  1096. 

manor  of,  p.  296. 

Newton  Somerville  (Niweton, 

Newenton),  314. 
Neyr,  Na3rr,  Richard  le.  940.   . 

Walter  le,  837. 

Neyrford,  John  de,  1190. 
Nicet,   Roger,   and    Matilda, 

his  wife,  1438. 
Nichol,  Nicol,  Alfred  de  964, 

1518. 
Nicholas,  Adam,  son  of,  and 

Alice,  his  wife,  1493. 
Thomas,  her  father, 

ib, 
Catherine,  late  wife  of 

Michael,      son     of,    420^, 

42qy. 

Peter,  son  of,  1 1 17. 

Ralph,    son    of,    420^, 

420//,  420^. 

Roger,  son  of,  382(47). 

Walter,  son  of,  915. 

William,  son  of,  527. 


Nicol.     Sec  Nichol. 
Nigel,  Robert,  604. 
Nighenhide.    See  Ninehead. 
Nighenhide,   Haghenilde    de, 

1081. 
Ninehead  Flory  (Nighenhide, 

Nygehide  Fluri),  508,  1081. 
Nitherton,  Richard  de,  946. 

Richard,  son  of  Robert 

de,  564. 

Niwelond*,  123. 

Niweton.  See  Newton  Somer- 
ville. 

Noblet,  Simon,  382(22). 

Noers,  Nodariis,  Nordariis, 
Nuers,  Colin  de,  724. 

Nicholas  de,  607,  734, 

loio,  1280. 

Norcheriton.      See    Cheriton, 

North. 
Nordcury,      Nortcuri.         See 

Curry,  North. 
Nordover.     See  Northover. 


Norens.    Su  Norreys. 
Norf,  Gilbert  de,  21. 
Norhtperiton.      See    Periton, 

North. 
Norman  (woman),  Sybil  the, 

280. 
Normandy,  280. 
Norreys,      Norreis,      Norens, 

Adam  le,  13 15. 

Gilbert  le,  470,  806. 

Henry,  of  co.   Stafibrd, 

849. 
John  le,  1455. 

Richard  le,  420C?)>  564» 


1481. 
—  Robert  le,  304. 
Thomas  le,  914. 


William  le,  382(27^. 

of  Cupton,  964. 

Nortberga,  Payn  de,  240. 
North   Barrow  (Northberwe), 

William,     son     of    Adam, 

chaplain  of,  1049. 
Northampton,  lOla,  I335>  p. 

337- 
Northbyr*  [?  Brewham,  North], 

956. 

Northover,  894,  907. 

Aucketin,  clerk  of,  908. 

Richard,      his 

brother,  ib, 

manor  of,  p.  259. 

Northover,  Nordover,  Hubert 
de,  908. 

lord  of,  1259. 

Osbert  de,  518,  1493. 

Andrew,    brother 

of,  1493- 
Northton,      Northon.         See 

Norton. 
Nortkoker.   See  Coker,  North. 
Nortman,  Sabina,  daughter  of 

William,  1 1 54. 
Norton  (Northon),  304,   354, 

977. 
hundred  of,  385,  pp.  37, 

271. 

Norton,  Arnold  de,  382(4^). 

Gunnild  de,  212. 

John  de,  1461. 

Jordan  de,  1 518. 

Reginald  de,  989. 

Sampson  de,  489. 

Norton  Ferris  (Norton),  1 52 1. 


Norton  Hanteville,  394(0- 
Norton  Malreward,  394(1). 
Nothweie,  Nicholas  by,  420. 
Notiford,  Roger  de,  722. 
Nourehyboum,  William,  385. 
Novo    Biurgo,    Maxgery    de, 

382(3^). 

Robert  de,  382(3^). 

Novo  Mercato.   William    de, 

47. 
Nuers.    See  Noers. 

Nuert', ,  997. 

Nuncio,  John  the,  1 31 2. 

Nuni, •  1033. 

Nunige,  Robert,  1092. 

Nunney  (Nuny),  1034,   1298, 

1299,  1308. 

Nuntin,  Walter,  382(m). 

Nuny,  Osbert  de,  841. 

Nutsford,  William  de,  3940). 

Nutherton.     See  Nitherton. 

Nnttelune,  Thomas,  806. 

Nygehide.     See  Ninehead. 


O. 

Oake   (Ake),   William,   reeve 

of,  130. 
Oare  (Ar),  224,  362. 
Ocford.  Randal  de,  382(2^). 
Ode,  Odde.     See  Hodde. 
Odecumbe,  Clarice  de,  1057. 
Matilda,  wife  of  Reginald 

de,  978. 
Odo,  Adam,  son  of,  382(5/). 
Oilly.     See  Oyly. 
Okeford,  Shilling.     See  ShU- 

ling  Okeford. 
Okeston,  John  de,  11 72. 
Oldefel,  Robert,  1355. 
Olebir',  1086. 
Oliver,  Jordan,  173,  247,  644, 

1024,  pp.  26,  28,  134,  135. 

Walter,  570. 

Orchard       (Orchyard,       Or- 

cheyrd),  1475- 
Orchard,  Orcherd,  Orchyard, 

Alexander  de,  129. 
Ascelina,   wife    of, 

129. 

Aymer  del,  4209,  1291. 

Humphrey  del,  1291. 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


503 


Orchard,  James  de,  382(4>6), 

420(*),  420(tf),  575,  1291- 
Estinera  (?),  daughter  of, 

575. 
Orchardleigh       (Orcherlegb), 

704. 
Orcherd.     Ste  Orchard. 
Orchyard.     S€e  Orchard. 
Ordaif,  Walter,  1456. 
Orekoyl,  Deorecuyl,  Richard 

de,  1384. 
Matilda,  his  sister, 

1384. 
Alice,   ditto,  1384. 

Orewell,  Oreweye,  William 
de,  483.  4871  864,  929, 
1207,  1491. 

Orthri,  Richard  de,  353. 

Christiana  his  wife, 

353- 
Ortiaco,   Ortyay,    Henry  de, 

292,    326.    383,    1285,    p. 

135 
Sabina     his    wife, 

326,  903,   I 188,    1454,    p. 

xxvi. 
Osbert,   Cicely,  daughter  of, 

298. 
Osbcrviir,    Hugh,    father    of 

Robert  de,  30,  31. 
Osmund,  John,  942. 
Ostet,  Adam  del,  1355. 
Ostricer,  Ostriciarius.  Ostriser, 

John  le,  394(1).  538. 

Thomas  le,  1463,  1477. 

Oswald,  Geoflfry,  son  of,  354. 
Olerford,    Otryford,    Eustace 

de,  1087. 

Henry  de,  1291. 

Lawrence,  son  of  Hugh 

de,  1086. 
Oterhampton,    Dyonisia    de, 

588,869. 
Oteri,   Oterige,   Otry,  Henry 

dc,  776. 

Martin  de,  72. 

Richard  de,  383. 

Othull,  Lucy  de,  1245. 
Olriford.     See  Olterford. 
Otry.     See  Oteri. 
Otryford.     See  Oterford. 
Otterford  (Otriford,  Oterford), 

124,  1087. 
Otterhampton,  378. 


Oxford,  pp.  126,  337. 

St.    Mary's    Church    in, 

1323. 
Oyly,   Oly,   Doyly,   Richard, 

602,  p.  xxvi. 

William  de,  453,  602. 

Oysebergh,  506. 


P. 

Pachet,  Robert,  1517. 

Page,   Richard,    42o(jr). 

Walter,    or    Walter    le, 

420(7),    441,    509»      695, 

1444. 
William,  691. 

of  Elleston,  89^. 


Pale,  Norman,  son  of,  282. 

Pain.     See  Payn. 

Painter,  Simon  the,  1482. 

Pakerel,  Robert,  22. 

daughter   of,   22, 

60. 
Pakering,  Henry  de,  572. 
Pakok,   Paukok,    Agnes,  late 

wife  of  Walter,  662. 

Robert,  662. 

Palmer    {le   Pammer),    Adam 

the,  of  Cherleton  Mucegros, 

141,  383*  388. 

John  the,  1 1 50. 

of  Babbekari,  1040. 

Clarice,     his    wiJFe, 

id, 

Nicholas  the,  382(4/). 

Roger,  son  of,  784. 

Agnes,  his  wife,  id, 

Joan  and  Isabella, 

his  daughters,  id, 

—  Alice,  his  mother. 


id. 


id. 


William,  his  Either, 


Walter  the,  604. 

William   the,   128,   624, 

826. 
Pamel,  Ada,  102. 
Pamer,  Her  .  .  ,  473. 
Pancevot,  Lanval,  424,  510. 
Pape,  Geoflry,  1226. 
William,  son  of  Ceroid', 

84. 
Paple,  John,  572, 


Pare,  Richard  le,  382(4*). 
Pardlestone.     in      Stringston 

(Parleston),  1 146. 
Parel,  Ranulf,  1 191. 
Paris,    Parys.     Alimona    dc, 

806. 
William      de,      3940). 

394(/).  424,  510,  587,  looi, 

1014,  1516. 
Parker,  Thomas  le,  750. 

Walter  Ic,  921. 

Parkton,  Roger  de,  51. 
Parret  river,  767.  922,   1073, 

1074,  1 1 17,  p.  134. 
Parseie,  Pashcie,  Richard  de, 

114. 

Waller  de.  1 14. 

Parson,  William  the,  771. 
Parys.     See  Paris. 
Pasheie.     See  Parseie. 
Pasti,  Passy,  Richard,  382(4^:), 

774.  ,       , 

Patele,     Paihel,     Hugh    dc, 

253.  384,  385- 
Nigel,  his  son,  253. 

Pateshull,  Martin  de,  330,  pp. 

26-28. 

Simon  de,  p.  2. 

Patewjne,  Reginald,  95 1. 

Aline,  his  wife,  id, 

Margaret,       his 

daughter,  id. 

William,  his  son,  id 

Eva,  his  servant,  id. 


Walter.  666. 

Pathel.     See  Patele. 

Patin,  Robert,  1 1. 

Patok,    Agnes,    late    wife    of 

Adam,  793. 
Patrich,  Patrik,  John,  1016. 

Robert,  773- 

Roger,  1092,  1093. 

Paukok.     See  Pakok. 
PaulesheU  Ralph  de,  149 1. 
Pauhon  (Peanton,    Pouldon), 

1502,  p.  409. 
Pavely,       Pavclly,       Pavilly, 

Robert     de,     I188,     II90, 

1274,  1275,  1292. 
Joan,    his    wife,     1274, 

1275. 

Walter  de,  691. 


Paver,  Robert  in,  472. 
Pavilly.    See  Pavely. 


S04 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Pawlet  (Polet,  Pulet,  Puolet), 

469,    475.    5oo»   520,    618, 

693,  846. 
Payn,     Pain,     Adam,     I474» 

1 501. 

Alan,  382(3tt). 

John,    and    Cecily,    his 

wife,  646,  647. 

Margery,     late    wife    of 


Roger.  89S. 
—  Nicholas,  830. 

William,  bailitt  of  Taun- 


ton  (Tampion),  1284. 
Paynel,    Paynol,    Alda,    359, 

360,  383. 

William,  383. 

the  younger,  1 452. 

Peanton.     See  Paulton. 
Peanion,    John    de,     382(i), 

394(0,  964. 
Pcche,  John,  1527. 

Pede,  William,  382(5^). 

Pedewell,  Gervase  de,  88. 

Ralph  de,  904. 

Pe;jenes,   Liota,   diaughter    of 

John  de,  1 1 20. 
Pegenesse.     See  Horsey  Pig- 

nes. 
Pegge,    Ralph,  of  Chatikyol, 

CO.  Dorset,  1053. 
Peiters,  Geoffry  de,  p.  2. 
Pek,  Godfrey,  1217. 
Pele,  Nicholas  dc  la,  848. 

Walter  de  la,  848. 

Pelham,  co.  Hereford,  53. 
Pelitun,  Roger,  1191. 
Pembrt>kc,     Earl     of.         See 

Marshall. 
Pen,   Penne,  Nicholas  de  le, 

1217. 
Humphrey,     and 

Hugh,  his  brothers,  id. 

Richard  de,  405. 

Robert  de  la,  536. 

Thomas  le,  701,  1017, 

Walter    de    la,    son    of 

Emma,  145. 

William,    of  Cherleton, 


202,  383,  385. 

—    of    Wynkaulton, 


974. 
Penard,    Elys,    son    of    Jul', 

1002. 
Robert  de,  64,  65. 


Penewine,  Geoffry,  848. 
Pennard,  East,  1008. 
Penne.     See  Pen. 
Penpe,  Richard,  72. 
Penselwood  (La  Penne),  145, 

1229. 
Pensowy,     near    Bridgwater, 

1121. 
Pentyn,  David  de,  496. 
Peper,  Roger,  944. 
Percy,  Robert  de,  444,  535. 
Pere.  Robert,  1 196. 
Peregrine,   Robert,  of  Blake- 
don,  781. 
Perers.     See  Perrers. 
Peres.     Nicholas      de,      and 

Beatrix,  his  wife,  58. 
Perham,   Thomas    de,    1098, 

1204,  1390. 
Perier,  Robert  del,  604. 

Walter  del,  604. 

Perinton.         See      Petherton, 

South. 
Periton.     See  Perton  and 

Petherton. 
Pernesfeld,  Aldina  de,  175. 
Perrers,     Perers,    Hugh    de, 

loia. 
Stephen  de,   and   Sara, 

his  wife,  654,  655. 
Perreton.       See    Perton    and 

Petherton. 
Perrott,  East  (Estpetet),  850. 
Perton.     See  Petherton. 
Perton,      Periton,      Perreton, 

Pyrton,  Pyrreton,  Pyridon, 

Alwina  de,  456. 

Hamode,  1206. 

John  de,  1491. 

Nicholas,  son  of  Robert 

de,  633. 

Thomas  de,    533,   539, 


1374,  1393- 
Pesse,  558. 

Pesse,  Hugh  de  la,  458. 

Peter,  Edward,  son  of,  54. 

Ralph,  son  of,  240. 

William,  son  of,  848. 

Petevin.     See  Peytevin. 

Petherton,  North  or  South 
(Periton,  Perton),  165,  304, 
456.  661,  1 108,  1 126,  1229, 
1428,  p.  453. 

hospitid  of,  I  loS. 


Petherton,  North  (Norhtpcri- 
ton,  Perton),  hundred  of, 
385.  693,  pp.  40,  293. 

Petherton,  South  (Perinton, 
Superton),  304. 

hundred  of,  pp.  56,  317, 


320. 


manor  of,  1059,  1 228. 


Petliun.  Osbert,  956. 

Petit,  Peiyt,  Agnes,  late  wife 

of  Robert  le,  1414. 

Henry  le,  1319,  1456. 

William  le,  403,  700. 

Petit  pas,   Robert,  essoiner  of 

Robert  the  scribe,  81. 
Pette,  Walter  de  la,  941. 
Petwede,  Ranulph,  81. 
Petyt.     Se^  Petit. 
Peverel,        Peveril,       Hugh, 

394(<-),    394(^),    555.    665, 

1 137. 
Isabella,  wife  of,  394(^), 

394(?),  613,  665. 

ofSanford,  103. 


John,  892. 

Peydias,  Geoffry,  1042. 
Peytevin,  John,  869. 

William,  1026. 

Philip,  William,  son  of,  672. 
Picher,  William  le,  1232. 
Picot,     Pycot,    John,     1376, 

1429,  1481. 

Thomas,  1490. 

Picter,  Peter,  964. 

Piddle,  Pidele,  John  de,  looi. 

Roger  de,  382(»). 

Pidecumbe.     Se^  Pilcombe. 
Pigace,  Pigaz,  Roger,  382(//), 

1227. 
Pigate  [?  Pigace],  Roger,  864. 
Pike,  William,  604. 
Pile,  Robert,  979,  p.  xxx. 
Pilewell,  Robert  de,  604. 
Pilk,  Walter,  604. 
Pille,  Adam  de  la,  814. 

Hugh  de  la,  152. 

Matilda,   wife  of. 


152. 


Robert  de  la,  814. 


Pillesdon,    Simon    de,     528, 

692. 

Thomas  de,  568. 

Pillok,   Pilloc,  John  cr  John 

de,  540,  580. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


SOS 


PiWok  fCon/d.f  Robert  dc,  1 128. 

William,  341,  394(g)' 

Pilton  (Pylton,    Pulton),  438, 

578. 
Pilton,  Walter  de,  736. 
Pin.     S^e  Pyn. 
Pincema,  Helias,  68. 
Pinel,  Richard,  1077. 
Pinnok,  Isabella,  daughter  of, 

752. 

Roger,  of  Bruton,  1472. 

Pinzun,  John,  809. 

Pipelcre,  Robert  of  Bruweton, 

242. 
Pijserwhit,  William,  271,  383, 

385. 
Pirho,  Pyrho,  Sybil  de,   1277. 

William  de,  431,  452. 

Pirinam,  Henry,  11 57. 

Pirun,  Richard,  92. 

Pitcombe  (Pidecimibe),  1371, 

1417. 
Pitney  (Potteney,  Puttenaya), 

326. 

manor  of,  1060. 

William,  parson  of,  326. 

Pitte,    Pute.     I*ut<>e,     Putte, 

John  de  la,  loii. 

Jordan  de  la,  1215. 

Peter,  1287. 

Robert,  1287. 

Roger  de  la,  473. 

Thomas  de  la,  186,  383. 

William  de,  382(4^). 

Playfeld,  William  de,  1074. 
Plente,  William,  1028. 
Plesse,    Cecily,   late  wife    of 

Hugh  de  la,  1360,  1367. 

Richard  de  la,  1491. 

William  de,  1490. 

Pleybir',  Alexander  de,  501. 
Emma,  wife  of  Roger  de, 

501. 

Roger  de,  1466. 

Ploughman  {cafcucarius)^ 

Henry   the,   of  Middleton, 

243- 
John  the,  197. 

of  Aldideford,  762. 


Richard  the,  420a. 

Robert  the,  569. 

Plukenay,  William  de,  609. 
Pockemora.  1 1. 
Pocok,  Richard,  2o6» 


Pode,  Robert,  604. 

Roger,  1093. 

Walter,  604. 

William,  604. 

Poelet,     William     dc,     and 

Robert,  his  brother,  394(n). 
Poer,  Poher,  Nicholas  le,  515. 
William  dele,  1423, 1427. 

See  also  Puher. 
Poghull,  Augustin  de,  980. 
Poher.     See  Poer. 
Poictou,  Richard,   Count   of, 

420///. 
Pointington  (Pultinton),  942. 
Poketeston,  William  de,  1 194. 
Polamford.     See  Polhamford. 
Polet,  William  de,  469,  846. 

William,  son  of  Walter 

de,  475. 

Polet.     See  PauleL 

Polhamford,  Polamford,  Wil- 
liam de,  1423,  1427. 

William,  his  father, 

ib. 

Pol  icon,  Ralph,  604. 

Pomeray,  Pomcraie,  Henry  la, 
362. 

William  de,  1472. 

Ponte,  Amicia,  late  wife  of 
Adam  de,  351. 

Christiana  de,  927. 

Geoffry  de,  1 182. 

John  de,  991. 

Roger  de,  86. 

Pontefracto,  Robert  de,  533. 

Sewall,  his  father, 

533- 
Pope,  Robert,  1287. 

Popelere,  Robert,  383. 

Pophill,  Hugh  de,  58a 

Porbige,  Agatha,  iate  wife  of 

Egelin  de,  78. 

Porlok,  Roges  de,  497. 

Porres,  Roger  de,  1122. 

Aubrey,      his 

daughter,  1 123. 

Port,  Porta,  Adam  de  or  Adam 
de  la,  866,  869. 

Aylmer  dc  la,  1079. 

Gilbert  de,  38. 

daughter  of,  38. 

Ralph  Ic,  1 1 51. 

Walter  de,  604. 

Portbury  (Porbir*),  304. 


Portbury,  hundre<l  of,  757,  p. 

253- 
Portbyri,    Portebeure,    Adam 

de,  627. 

Rol)ert,  382(4/). 

Portebref,     William,     394(<')> 

648,  1 521. 
Porter,  Roger  le,  666,  1463. 
Matilda,     wife    of, 


533. 


of  Cumbe,  941. 
Thomas  le,  938,  941. 
Thomas  de,  382(4^). 


Porterose,  Robert,  76a 

Portesham,  876. 

Portesham,    William,   son  of 

Agatha  de,  876. 
Portesheved,  l*orteshave,  Elias 

de.  358,  383- 

Isabella  de,  672. 

Robert  de,  382(4//). 

Porthehull,  Augustin  de,  982. 

Robert,  his  brother,  ib. 

Portman,  John,  223,  383. 
Portrarius,  Roger,  546. 
Potel,    Durant,   of   Warham, 

939. 
Poter,  Geoffry  le,  1484. 

Potteney.     See  Pitney. 

Poulet.     See  Pawlet. 

Poundsford  (Punderford,  Pun- 

dercsford),  1 24,  1089. 
Poveslehad,  Ralph  de,  1 44 1. 
Poydras,  Walter,  969. 
Prat,  Hugh,  1287. 

Humphrey,  540,  664. 

John,  1451. 

Prentuc,  Robeit,  764. 

Pres,  Richard,  977. 

Prest,  Robert  le,  of  Mellens, 

820. 
Prestel.     See  Pricstleigh. 
Preston,  375,  1479-     ^^  also 

Priston. 
Preston,  Alfred  de,  869. 
Gilbert  de,  pp.  1 18,  135, 

424»  455.  3dii- 
Juliana  de,  466. 

Osbert  dc,  866. 

Thomas  de,  869. 

William  de,  382(4W'). 


Prcwrise,  John  de,  382(2^). 
Priddy  (Bridie),  151. 
Pridias,  Geoffry  de,  p.  452. 

3  T 


So6 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Priest,  Elias  the,  577. 

Roi»ert,  son  of,  806. 

son  of  David  the, 

29S. 
Priestleigh,    in    Doulting 

(Prestel),  438,  953. 
Pfillok.  John,  953. 
Prior,  Priur,  Hugh  le,  1 5  22. 

William,  son  of  the,  86. 

Priston  (Picston),  208,  383. 
Priur.     See  Prior. 
Provur,  Robert  le,  982. 

William  le,  1 103. 

Pruc,    Pnice,     Pruz,    Adam, 

299. 

Geoffry,  1283. 

Prudd,  William,  1 103. 
Pruel,  Walter,  of  Yatton,  762. 
Pruz.     See  Pruc. 
Pubeler,  Robert  le,  of  Bniton, 

383. 
Pul)low  (Pubelawe),  lOla. 

Pudding,  John,  304. 

K..  384,  385. 

William,  of  Suton,  980. 

Pudinton,  Peter  de,  381. 

Puher,    Puhier,    Richard    le, 

604. 
William  le,  604. 

See  also  Poer. 
Puleyn,  Walter,  788,  1021. 
Pultidon,  Peter  de,  304. 
Pultinton.     See  Pointington. 
Pulton.     See  Pilton. 
Punchard,  Oliver,  613. 

Robert  de,  1498. 

William  de,  pp.  444, 449. 

Punderford.     See  Poundiford. 
Punsont,  Nicholas  de,  p.  136. 
Punter,  Stephen  le,  453. 
Puolet,  Pulet.     See  Paul  et 
Purchaz,  William,  8. 
Purgthoo,  Richard,  869. 
Purie,    Purye,    Adam   de   la, 

1 1 16. 

—  William  de  la,  1038. 
Purie,  Roger  de,  61. 
Puriton  (Pyrinton),  421. 
Pute,  Putte,  Putoc.    See  Pitte. 
Puttenaya.     See  Pitney. 
Pycot.     See  Picot. 
Pylle  (La    Pulle),   water    of, 

1 122. 
Pylton.     See  I'llton. 


Pympe,  John  de,  1400. 

Pyn,  Pyne,  Pin,  Herbert  de, 

382(2r). 

Roger  le,  1226. 

Hugh,  his  brother, 

1226. 

William  de  la,  420/. 


Pyrhou.     See  Pirho. 
Pyrinton.     See  Puriton. 
Pyrton,     Pyrreton,     Pyridon. 
See  Perton. 


Q- 

Quantockshead       (Kantekes- 

havd),  174,  1 144. 
Little     (Litelcantekes- 

haved),  174,  383. 
Quarm   Monceaux   (Quarem), 

1490. 
Quarrel,   Herbert,    196,   197, 

383. 

Osbert,  382(3^). 

Queneir,  WiUiam,  8. 
Quentin.     See  Quintin. 
Quercu,  Walter  de,  of  Douliz, 

196,  197. 
Querendon,  William   de   and 

Agatha,  his  wife,  299. 
Queynterel,  Richard,  813. 
Quintin,     Quentin,     Richard, 

1431- 
William,  369,  383,  1431. 

See  also  Sancto  Quintino. 


R. 

Rachel  [?  Regil.  in  Winford], 

1496. 
Raddington        (Radingeton), 

176,  383- 
Radeflet.     See  Radlet. 
Radeklive,  John,  son  of  Agnes 

de  la,  488. 
Radene,  Adam  de,  643. 
Roger    de,     639,     647, 

1038. 
Thomas,  the  clerk  of, 

643- 

William  de,  394(/>),  569, 


1038,  1 52 1. 
Radeslode.     See  Radlet. 


Radestok,  Randolf,  son  of  the 

miller  of,  991. 
Radinges.     See  Reading. 
Radington,  Richard  de,  1 165. 
Radlet  (Radeflet,  Radeslode), 

485,  1442. 
Radstock  (Radestoke),  365. 
Raft,  Randal,  of  Kuri  Mallett, 

384. 
Ragelbyre,  660. 
Rak,  John  de,  1482. 
Rakesdeswory,     Robert     de, 

1456. 
Ralegh,     Raleg,    Simon    de, 

421,  422,  587,  I359«i  1361. 
William  de,  295,  394^, 

p.  426. 

Wymer  de,  1265. 

Ralph,  father  of  Adam,  10. 
Gunalda,    daughter    of, 

337-  ,    ^ 
Henry,  son  of,  383. 

Hodierna,   daughter   of, 

337 


John,  son  of,  657. 

—  Katherine,  late  wife  of 
Michael,  son  of,  394a,  420». 

—  Ralph,  son  of,  459. 
Richard,  son  of,  53,  459, 


572 


William,  son  of,  382(01), 

394(^). 
of  Linham,  Henry,  son 

of,  214. 
Ramesden,  Thomas  de,  1463, 

1466. 
Isabella,  his   wife, 

1466. 
Rammes',  John  de,  1527. 
Rammescumbe,      Sybil      de, 

1 1 36. 
Randevin,  Hugh,  594. 
Alpesia,    his   wife, 

594- 
Ranulf,  Hugh,  son  of,  392. 

Ranun,  Adam,  382  (22/). 

Rat,  John  le,  1075. 

RaiUces,  Richard,  382(r). 

Raymond,  Refund,  Eva, 
late  wife  of,  066. 

W^illiam,  of  Southamp- 
ton, 1283. 

Reading  (Radinges),  1358, 
1361,  pp.  131,  132. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


507 


Rechiche,  John  de,  1243. 

Red,  Walter,  384,  385. 

Redcliff,  in  Bristol  (Radeklive, 

La   Radeclive),    302,   525, 

526,  596,  695,  784,    787, 

795.  798,  800,  805,    806, 

P-  135- 
church  of,  808. 

prior  of  the  Hospital  of 

St.  John  at,  596. 

the  street  of,  p.  238. 


Redeford,    William    de,    382 

Redeslo,  William  de  la,  382 

(4/). 
Redlinch     (Redlis,     Rodlis), 

232,  352,  955.  956. 
Richard,  the  serjeant  of, 

955. 
Reeve,  Adam  the,  363,  572. 

Emma,     late     wife    of 

Walter  the,  676. 

John  the,  304. 

Osbert  the,  of  La  Legh, 


lOII. 

—  Randolph  the,  1355. 

of^    Curri     Malet, 

1226. 

Richard    the,    of   Dun- 


heved,  1013. 

—  Roger  the,  814. 

—  Wdter,  son  of  Richard 
the,  loi^. 

—  William  the,  383,  1145. 
son  of,  240. 


Refford,  Rifford,  William  de, 

14,  19. 
Reginald,  Henry,  son  of,  573. 

John,  son  of,  952. 

{factor  rogorum)^  125. 

Sabina,  daughter  of,  125. 

Warresius,    son    of  and 

Alice,  his  wife,  524,  568. 
William,  son  of,  I. 


Re|jny.     See  Re^y. 

Reini,       Reigni,        Reingni, 

Reinni.    See  Re3my. 
Reinies,  Rinis,  John  le,  1 521. 

Roger  de,  23. 

Emma,  wife  of,  23. 

Rempe,  Geoflfry,  382(r). 
Ren,  John  de,  382(^. 
Rendel.     See  Ridel. 
Rengny,  Renny.    See  Reyny. 


Res,  Michael  de,  382(5^). 
Reungny.    See  Reyny. 
Revel,   Revell,  RiviU,  Ryvil, 

Peter  de,  1379,  1383. 

Richard,  759. 

Robert,  1472. 

Sabina,       daughter      of 

Richard,  602,  619. 

Samson,  382(2^). 

William,  23,  36,  37. 


Reymund.     Su  Raymond. 

Reyny,  Reyni,  Reiny,  Reinni, 
Reigni,  Regny,  Rengny, 
Reingni,  Reungny,  Renny, 
Henry  de,  1207. 

Ingeretta,  wife  of  Wil- 
liam de,  464. 

John  de,   57,   178,  247, 


304,  342,  383,  394(^),  394 
(/>),  421.  432,  450,  485, 
587,  1082,  pp.  26,  28,  136. 

—  Roger  de,  1491. 

—  Thomas  de,  1 194,  1463, 


1470. 


and  Joan,  his  wife, 


404. 


Richard,  Clarice,  wife  of  John 

son  of,  8^8. 
Dyonisia,    daughter    of, 

647. 

Earl,  497. 

Eljras,  son  of,  688. 

Henry,     son     of,    902, 


1375.  1386. 

—  Herbert,  son  of,  282. 

—  John,    son  of,  382(3^), 
604,  p.  3. 

—  Nicholas,  son  of,  519. 
John  and  Geoffiry, 


his  brothers,  519. 

—  Philip,  son  of,  1063. 

—  Roger,  son  of,  1287. 

—  William,  son  of,  90,  loi, 
674,  1287. 

uncle  of  John,  16. 


Riche,  Thomas  le,  1309, 13 16, 

."333- 
Ricke,  Hereward,  1028. 

Ridel,  Ridell,  Rendel,  Rudel, 
Jordan,  102,  306,  313,  383, 
551,  1382,  1403. 

Jordan,  son  of,  523. 

of  Cusinton,  889. 


Robert,  1382,  1403. 


Rifford.     See  Refford. 
Rikelin,   Alexander,    son    of, 

865. 
Rimpton  (Rimton),  942. 
Ringdsim,  Hugh  de,  984. 
Rinis.     Su  Reinies. 
Ripariis,   William   de,    1 25 1, 

1423,  1427. 
Riscumbe,  Ralph  de,  1 1 33. 
Rivere,   Richard   de  la,  493, 

710. 
Rivill.     See  Revel. 
Road  (Roda,   La    Rode,   La 

Rade),  25,  1027,  1036. 

Hugh  of  the  mill  of,  1 151. 

Robe,  Robin,  108. 

Robert,   Christiana,  daughter 

of,  394,  473- 

Geoffry,  son  of,  1287. 

Hugh,  son  of,  485,  486. 

James,  son  of,  1 192. 

John,  son  of,  604. 

Lawrence,  son  of,  990. 

Nicholas,   son    of,   491, 

682,  696,  734. 
Ralph,  son  of,  Matilda, 

wife  of,  485,  486. 

Richard,  son  of,  1 4,  44. 

Robert,  son  of,  940. 

Warner,   father    of,   36, 

37. 

W.,  son  of,  46. 

William,  son  of,  431. 

Rocy,  Richard,  572. 

Roda.     See  Road. 

Rode,   Emma,    late    wife    of 
Geoflfry,  427. 

Hugh,  572. 

Ralph  de  la,  1 194. 

Rodlis.     See  Redlinch. 

Rodmerton,  Alice  de,  659. 

Rod'nia,  Robert,  379. 

Roger,  Agatha,  daughter  of, 
316. 

^— William,   her    bro- 
ther, 316. 

Herbert,  son  of,  124. 

Nicholas,    son    of,   559, 


651,  877,  936. 
—  Wentliana,  wife  of  Nicho- 
las son  of,  420^,  420^. 

William,    son    of,    591, 


722. 
Roie.     See  Roy. 


So8 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Roke,  Rok,  Edith,  late  wife 

of  William  la,  843. 

Geoffry,  1 194. 

Peter  de  la,  856. 

Richard,  765. 

William,  304. 

Rolveston.     See  Rowlston. 
Romo.  William,  271. 
Rosel.     See  Russel. 
Rothelc,  Thomas  de,  430. 
Rowlston  (Rolveston,  Rolues- 

ton),  1339,  1 34 1,  1353. 

manor  of,  697. 

Roy,  Roie,  Ruy,  Gilbert,  604. 

Henry  de,  1 172. 

William  de,  604. 

Rudel.     See  Ridel. 
Ruffa,  Christiana,  771. 
Ruffus,  Adam,  56. 

Geoffry,  788. 

son   of   Alexander, 

808. 

John,  of  Lamihet,  394^* 


394/- 

—  Hugh,  1 26 1. 

—  Peter,  394(^).  SS^- 

—  Ralph,  772. 

—  Richard,  270,  383,  385. 
941,  1045. 

—  Stephen,  1 262. 
William,  326,  761,  806. 


Rugccote,  Thomas,  982. 

William,  42CW,  864. 

Ruj^ehide,  Henry  de,  273. 
Rugge,  Simon,  1191. 

Robert,  604. 

Walter  de  la,  1209. 

W^illiam,  604. 

Ruhill,  William  de,  382(«). 
Rumesie,  Walter  le,  382(//). 
Rupe,  Adam  de,  87. 
Rupcir,  Henry  de,  572. 
Rus,  Russe,  Joan,  wife  of  Peter 

le,  1414. 
John     le,     1337,     1344. 

1347.    »376,     1385.     '39i» 

1395.  .1397,  I4ti»  P-  !«• 
Juliana  la,  148. 

Ralph  le,  1 376. 

Ricnard  le,  1 141. 

Robert  le,  1 3  76. 

Roger  le,  1376. 

Rusell,  Rusel,    Rosel,  Adam, 

922. 


Russel,  David,  1433. 

Geoffry,  looi,  1337. 

Hugh,  304. 

John,  346,  1036. 

and    Margery,    his 

wife,  1309,  1316,  1333. 

Nicholas,  637. 

Osbert,  1023. 

Peter,     Z%2{y>),     1383, 

1384. 
Ralph,  637,  1036,  1440. 

•  Isabella,    his   wife, 


638. 


-  of  Edmeston,  733. 
Robert,  423,  844,  1238. 
Walter,     his     son. 


423. 


423. 


Isolde,  his  wife, 

Constance  and  Mar- 
gery, his  daughters,  423. 
Matilda,    his    con- 
cubine, 423. 

of  Alverington  ( Al- 


lerton),  852. 

of  Cudinton,  452. 

—  Roger,  382(3/^). 

—  Thomas,  604,  1456. 

—  Walter,       1 145,       1320, 


1352- 

—  William,      394^^,       575, 


1322. 

of  Stanton,  452. 

Russepin,  Robert,  11 50. 
Ruter,  Godfrey  le,  382(5a). 
Ruy.     See  Roy. 
Ryer,   Helewise,   daughter  of 

John,  681. 
Ryvere.    See  Rivere. 
Ryvil.     See  Revel. 


S. 


Sachel,  Nicholas,  806. 

St.  Albans,  107. 

St.  Decuman,  1144,  1266. 

St.    Edward,    Shaftesbury, 

abbess    of,     382(2^),    974, 

1521. 
St.  John  of  Jerusalem,  prior  of 

the  Hospital  of,  430. 
St.  Michael,  well  of,  1236. 
Sakel,  Richard,  806. 


Sale,  Robert  de  la,  1058. 
Salisbury,  Earl  of,  185,  424, 

937. 
bishop  of,  1255. 

Thomas,  archdeacon  of, 

939. 
Salso    Marisco,    Maurice    de 

and  Joan,  his  wife,  1355. 
Salter,  Robert  le,  of  Huies- 

puU,  930. 

William  le,  1178. 

S^pford  (Samford)  Arundel, 

church  of,  395. 
Sampson,    Samps*,    Richard, 

431. 

Theophila,  daugh- 
ter of,  549. 

Henry,       her 

brother,  549. 

Sancto  Audoeno,  Ralph  de  and 
Godelieh,  his  wife,  1528. 

Sancta  Bajrba,  Seintebarbe, 
Cecily,  daughter  of  Ralph 
de,  513. 

Robert  de,  421,  513,  569, 

1333. 


Muriel,     wife     of, 
1306,    1309,     1316,     1318, 

1332-34- 
Sancto    Claro,    Seyn    Oere, 

Lady  Hawise  de,  983. 

Robert    de,     1068, 

1 190,  1281,  1455. 

William  de,  149 1. 


Sancta  Cnice,  Rob^  de,  768, 

964. 
Sancto  Edwardo,  Warin  de, 

865. 
Sancto  Edmundo,  William  de, 

965.  PP-  I35»  3clii. 
Sancta  Fide,  William  de,  34. 
Sancto    Georgio,    Christiana, 

wife  of  Walter  de,  522. 
Richaind     and 

Geoffiry,  her  sons,  522. 
Sancto  Johanne,  John  de,  of 

Balun,  869. 
Sancto  Laudo,  Roger  de,  304, 

381. 
Sancto  Mauro,  Mora,  Seinmor, 

Henry  de,  1249. 
Lawrence     de,     394(/)» 

877,  964. 
Nicholas  de,  1038. 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


509 


Sancto  Maaro,  etc^  Richard 

de,  1036. 
Sancto  Quintino,  Walter  de, 

archdeacon    of     Taunton, 

1304,1322. 1418,1443, 1444. 

See  also  Quintin. 
Sancto  Stephano,  William  de, 

423. 
Sancto  Vitoro,  Humphrey  de, 

535- 
Sandford  (Sanford),  103. 

Sandford     Orcas     (Stanford, 

Saunford),      1377,       1379, 

I383»  1384*  1402. 
Albert,  parson   of,  945, 

1384. 
Sandhull,  Ralph  de,  636,  675. 
Sandputte,  Tohn  de,  946. 
Sanford,  Edward  de,  114. 

Henry  de,  797. 

Hugh  de,  103. 

James  of,  114. 

Stephen,  reeve  of,  1 14. 

Santon,  Thomas  de,  726,  729. 
Sanzaver,  Hugh  and  Emma, 

his  wife,  515,  614. 
Sapewyk,  Reginald  de,  627, 

Saphin,  John,  1424. 
Sara,  mother  of  Edith,  1277. 
Saracin,  Sarazin,  John,  599. 
Tohn  le,  dean  of  Wells, 

1365. 

Philip  le,  8. 


Sarii,  Richard,  770. 
Sarmuner,  Hugh  le,  1344. 
Sarmunvill,  Sarumvill,  Philip 

de,  314,  382(3/). 

William  de,  383. 

Saunford.         See      Sandford 

Orcas. 
Sauscr,  Robert  le,  1038. 

William,  976. 

Sauvage,  Adam,  299. 

Godfrey,  382(2^). 

Ralph  le,  417,  515. 

of  Cherleton,  614. 

Savouer,  Godstan  le,  328. 

Richard  le,  383. 

Say,  Matilda  de,  317,  383. 

Richard  de,  382(411). 

Robert  de,  869. 

Sccr,  Walter  le,  1 145. 
Scerepe.     See  Screppe. 


Scha()ewyk,  Reginald  de, 
1 1 17. 

Scharp,  Scherpe,  Adam,  760. 

Richard,  1474. 

Walter,  1504. 

Schepeton.     See  Shepton. 

Schepton.  See  Shepton  Mon- 
tague. 

Schepton  Vivon.  See  Shep- 
ton Mallet. 

Scherpe.    See  Scharpe. 

Schet,  Gilbert,  of  Stoke,  977. 

Nicholas  de,  iioi. 

William,  his  brother, 

IIOI. 

Robert  de,  1 491. 


Schipelcary.     See  Gary  Fitz- 

payn. 
Schiplade.     See  Shiplade. 
Schislode.     See  Gheselade. 
Schordiche,  Adam  de,  1079. 
Schorlac,  Robert,  of  Himing- 

don,  992. 
Schund.     See  Seunk. 
Schyreburn.      See  Sherborne. 
Scipman,  William,  1073. 
Scissor,  Jordan,  569. 

Ralph,  of  Gomwall,  960. 

Robert,  of  Ghildecump- 

ton,  958. 

WilUam,  638. 


Scolande,  Geoffry  de,  1490. 
Scompeton,  Anketil  de,  267. 
Scorie.     See  Scuri. 
Scot,  Scott,  Skot,  Alexander 

le,  8c6. 

Martin  the,  1520. 

Walter  the,  830. 

William,  1287. 

Scovill,  Humphry  de,  382(4/^/), 

964. 
Screppe,     Scerepe,     Robert, 

1283,  1295. 
Scrogaine,  John,  804. 
Scudimore,  Peter  de,  sheriff, 

84,  92,  101,  p.  3. 
Scuri,  Scurye,  Scorie,  Robert, 

814. 

Roger,  931,  932,  p.  xlix. 

Scuringe,      Gilbert,     son     of 

Richard,  817. 
Scute,  Matthew,  604. 
Seavington      (Sevenhamton'), 

43. 


Seavington,  Robert,  parson  of, 

1477. 
Sedlep,     Richard     de,     115, 

383- 
Segar*,  William,  son  of,  69. 

Scgelingc,  836. 

Segravc,  Gilbert  de,  1521. 

Stephen  de,  620. 

Seinmor.     See  Sancto  Mauro. 

Seintebarbe.         See      Sancta 

Barba. 
Seleiner,  Walter,  1144. 
Seles,  Geoffry  de,  97. 

Robert  de,  946. 

Seleuin,  Selvayn,  John,   353, 

472. 
Julia,  mother  of  William, 

353. 
Selewaye,  Walter  de,  812. 

Selewood,  William,  1434. 
Selvayn.     See  Seleuin. 
Selver.     See  Monksilver. 
Selwood,  1024. 
Selworthy  (Seleworh),  471. 
Sene,  John,  of  Limin',  1042. 

A  vice,  his  wife,  ib, 

Serel,    John,    of   Cijselberg, 

978. 
Serjeant,    Serviens,    Godfrey 

the,  1287. 

Henry  the,  604. 

Hugh  the,  1151 

John  the,  908. 

Nich.  the,  1498. 

Osbert  the,  604. 

—  Stephen,  his  brother, 


ib. 


Richard   the,   569,  604, 


1287. 

—  Robert  the,  604. 

—  Simon  the,  1429. 

—  Stephen  the,  1501. 

—  Thomas  the,  1526. 
Walter,  1497. 


Serle,  Nicholas  le,  Serjeant  of 
Upton  [Noble],  953. 

Serun,  John,  1 102. 

Serviens.     See  Serjeant. 

Seuans,  Adam  de,  149 1. 

Seunk,  Schund,  Walter,  of 
Taunton,  384,  385. 

Sevel,  Walter,  1452. 

Scvenhamton.  See  Seaving- 
ton. 


5IO 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Sevenhamton,  Anger  de,  382 

(2/). 
Seward,    Si  ward,    Henry,   of 

Cumpton,  777. 

William,  1023. 

Sewarius,  John,  245. 
Seymonestord,  624. 
Seyn  Clere.    5^Sancto  Claro. 
Seynnoc,  Isabella,  daughter  of 

John,  394(^). 
Seys,  Peter,  1487. 

William,  971. 

Seytouns,  Richard,  1 1 75. 
Shaftesbury,   abbess  of.      See 

St.  Edward. 
Sheerston,    in    N.    Petherton 

(Siredeslon),  147a 
Shene<lon,  manor  of,  420^. 
Shepherd,  Gregory  the,  232, 

236. 

Jordan  the,  1497. 

Martin  the,  813. 

Philip  the,  200,  383-5. 

Richard  the,  151. 

Robert  the,  1 182. 

[bercarius)^  William  the, 

of  Dene,  210,  383. 
Shepton,   Schepeton,   Sipton, 

Gilbert  de,  338. 

John  de,  382(  j^). 

William  de,  801. 

Shepton   Beauchamp  (Schep- 

ton,  Seplon),  1 22 1,  1225. 
Shepton  Montague  (Schepton, 

Scopton,  Sipton),  140,  943. 
Osbert,  the  chaplain  of. 


969. 


Robert,  his  brother. 


ib, 
Sherborne  (Schyrebum,  Sire- 

burne),     co.     Dorset,    206, 

564,  686,  965,  1266,  1268, 

pp.  27,  135. 

abbot  of,  1279. 

Sherewund,  Robert,  382(2^). 
Sherpe.     See  Scharpe. 
Sheslede.     See  Cheselade. 
Shilling     Okeford     (Acford), 

CO.  Dorset,    tithing  of,   90, 

loi,  394(^)- 
Shiplade,  in  Bleadon  (Schip- 

lade),  590. 
Shipton.     See  Shepton. 
Shileroc,  Simon  de,  216,  383. 


Shockerwick,     in      Bathford 
(Sokerwyk,       Shokerwyk), 

745- 
Shorham,  Robert  de,  634. 

Sideliz  (near  Yeovil),  314. 

Sidenham,  in  Bridgwater,  423. 

Sidenham,  Philip  de,  475. 

Sidereston.     See  Sheerston. 

Sifferwast,  Syfrewast,  Roger, 

1000. 

Simon  de,  946. 

Sigewell,  Geoffry  de,  491. 

Sigge,  Anketill,  73. 

Simer,  Walter  le,  1062. 

—  John,  his  brother. 


ib. 


ib. 


Cecily,  his  mother. 


Simon,  Adam,  son  of,  8. 

Anastasia,   daughter  of, 

1505. 

Ralph,  son  of,  382(2^). 

Roger,  son  of,  496. 

Rogo,   son  of,  382 (4a), 


587,  1 1 36. 
—  Thomas,  son  of,  1466. 
William,  son  of,  1 309. 


de, 


and 


Simple,  Hugh  le,  1 151. 
Sindertome,       Robert 

382(3^). 
Sine,  John,  643. 
Singe,  Robert,  145 1. 
Sipton.      See     Shepton 

Shepton  Montague. 
Sireburne.     See  Snerbome. 
Sisthamton'  (in  Brent  Marsh), 

28. 
Si  ward.     See  Seward. 
Skilgate,  1148. 
Skinner,  Roger  the,  240. 
Skirw)m,  Robert,  1475. 

Walter,  1475. 

Sley,  William,  15 12. 
Slou,  Walter  de,  604. 
Slunbrige,  Geoffry  de,  825. 
Smalbrok,  William,  1 21 5. 
Smale,    Small,    Geoffry    the, 

I137. 

Nicholas  le,  858. 

William  le,  738. 

Smalecuml)e,    Elena,   wife   of 

William  de,  1 145. 
Smalfis,   Ralph  and   Matilda, 

his  wife,  303. 


Small.     See  Smale. 
Smalnis,  William,  304. 
Smalprud,  Adam,  1257. 
Smethe,  Roger,  382(4^:). 

William,  604. 

Sminhay,        in        Melverton 

(Smithehey,     Smithenhay), 

1208,  1209. 
Smith,  Andrew  the,  289. 

John  the,  473,  569,  900. 

of    Camelnimar, 


901. 


Osbert  the,  of  Qeeve,  872. 
Richard  the,  1 145. 
of    La     Penne, 


971. 

—  Robert,  son  of  William 

the,   and   Agnes,  his  wife, 
910. 

—  Robert  the,  of  Pukinton, 


95- 


98. 


Simon  the,  70. 
WUliam  the,  98. 

Edith,  his  mother, 

William,  of  Hessod,  149. 

William,  son  of,  149 

Smith enhey,  Osbert  de,  1209. 

Snel,  Richard,  299. 

Snelgar,    Alice,    daughter    of 

Thomas,  1067. 
Sock  Denys  (Soc),  Ralph,  the 

prior  of,  1056. 
Sokerwyk.     See  Shockerwick. 
Sokerwyk,  Roger  de,  745. 
Soliny.     See  Suleny. 
Solurio,  Herbert  de,  1106. 
Somerset,  county  of,  554. 
Somerton    (Sumerton),     304, 

903,  953,  P-  134. 
hundred  of,    167,    385, 

PP-  57,  257. 

manor  of,  167,  p.  258. 

Soper,  Robert  le,  121 5. 

Walter  le,  1 1 86,  1 187. 

Sor,  John  le,  420^. 

Robert  le,  382(2/). 

Sorel,  Sorell,  Adam,  1287. 

Walter,  his  son,  ib. 


Ralph,  383. 


Sorewell,  William  de,  p.   134. 
Sorye,  Richard  de,  723. 
Sot,    Adam,    of    Aldideford, 
762. 


^Vl 

HH 

fflST                                 Sit                   ^H 

So»i,     Sowy,    Nicholas    lie, 

Slane.  Matthew  de,  408- 

Suwldgh    (Suuleeh),    Alex*               ^^M 

iSM")- 

Theobald      dc      U,     of 

ander.  chaplain  of,  1161.                       ^^H 

Ranald  de,  1117, 

Wynescumbe,  776. 

Stede,  Robert,  149,  121.                           ^^H 

Soiwyne,  Richard.  97a. 

Richard  de.  281. 

Stephen,  John,  son  of,  940.                    ^^H 

SpaJieston,  Spekdon,  Spuke- 

Robert  de  la,  394(''). 

Waller,  son  of.  382(10).                     ^H 

Icm.   William   de,   383(5^-), 

Stanford.   Stc  Sandford  Orcas. 

Slemewaye,  William  dc,  459.                   ^^M 

Si'altm,'p^p  de,  J78. 

Stujiham,  Simon  de,  1137. 

Stcrt,  manor  of.  1051.                               ^^H 

Stanlegh.     Su  Slowlcigh. 

Stcrte,  Stertn.  Henry  de,  460.                  ^^H 

Spark.  Mabel,  liai. 

Stanlegh,  liervi  de.  1207. 

Walter  de  la.  134.                              ^^1 

Nicholas,  ii«. 

Slant.  John,  wD  of  Robert  de, 

Steward,  William  the,  735-                       ^H 

Robert,  991,  1111. 

56S. 

Scihelnaye.  Wallerde,  811.                       ^^M 

William,  4wy- 

and    faliana.    his 

Slanlellun,  Walter  de,  1055. 

Stile,  R^er  de  la,  506.                              ^^H 
StincloD,  Richard  de,  569.                         ^^H 

Stanton  (Staunton),  ao8,  a6t. 

•ife.  548- 

45  J.      5 '7.      "300,      1302, 

StineW.  189.383.      .                               ^M 

Sabina,  their  mya. 

1307- 

Gary  Fibpayn.                                       ^^M 

548. 

Walter,  parson  of,  1197, 

S|iwkford,  »ss.  705- 
Spwkford,  Hemy  dc,  705. 

130J.  1307,  1335. 

Stockland  (Stoctande),  440i>,                  ^^M 

John,  his  son,  130a. 

603.                                         ^H 

Ralph  de,  41. 

StanloQ,  Staunton,  Christiana 

Stockwood,  549,                                        ^^H 

Robert  de.  705,  7ir. 

de.  161. 

Stodl<«h.     St^  Sludln.                            ^^M 
Stoeumber    (Stoke    Gunner],                  ^^H 

Spaiidiog,  William  de,  lo8a. 

Drc£o  de  and  Alice,  his 

wife,  388,  318,  1S97,  1300, 

Spaulerg,Sp.uldcr,  Philip  dc. 

177.  399-                                                ^^1 

113.  384.  385. 

1301.     1307,     IJ14,    131S, 

Thomas,  parson  of,  1 345,                  ^^M 

Spckelon.     Sii  Spakeslon. 

1315.  "335- 

13S0.                                                      ^H 

Spicer,  Speccr,  Robert  le,  55. 

— —   Drogo,  iheir  son. 

Stok,  Stoke,  Stokke,  Stokca,                  ^^1 

Thomas  le,  1173. 

"97- 

Adam  de,  383.                                        ^^M 

Henry  dc.  loS. 

SFdleman,  William.  788. 

Hugh  de.  394('-). 

^M 

^    -^^JK,!;-'"'- 

- — -  John  de,  432,  600. 
Matilda  de,  1084. 

Christiana,   late  wife  oX                  ^^H 

Richard  dc,  649.  1189.                          ^^M 

^^K          William,  571. 

William,     her 

Edith,  mother  of  William                  ^^H 

^H          Splottc,  Walter  de  la,  136;, 

husband,  a. 

9S7-                                                   ^H 

^^H           Spowe,  Robert,  1173. 

Robeitde.  510.  528. 

Elias.  »n  of  Adam.  358.                  ^H 

^^H          Spmgel,  Walter,  1510. 
^^M          S|>rakeliiig,  Waller,  571. 

Roger  de,  1450. 

Eustace  de.  18,  40,  79.                     ^^H 

Roy.  de,  382(4*1. 

-Stephen  de,  550,  565. 

Margaret,  wife  of,                  ^^H 

^^H          Sprot.  Henry,  1311. 

^H 

^^m          John,  929,  r496. 

Thomas  de,  1099. 

Geoftry  de,  940.                                ^^H 

^^1          Spuketon.    3«  Spakeston. 

WiUiam  de.  8,  1204. 

Gregory  de,  466.                               ^^H 

^^M          Staflbrd,  J09. 

Stapele,  Adam  de,  382(4/)- 

Hamo.  1506.                                     ^^H 

^^H          Staflbrd.     Richard    dc      and 

^tapl\  394(0. 

John  de  la.  19.  60,  394-                    ^H 

Osbert.     son    of    John.                  ^H 

^H              Sarnh,  bis  wife,  416. 

Slaplelon,  near  Marloek,  267, 

^H          ^  Stephen  de.  315,  383. 
^^H          .Stoingrevc.  John  de,  1400. 

1068. 

^H 

Suunton.     Su  Stanton. 

Roger  dc.  1183.                                ^^H 

^^1          Stanbard,  Richard,  ttSl. 

Thomas  de,  19.                                 ^^H 

of,  433.  652.  701. 

- — -  Walter  de.  382I*),  785.                     ^H 

Slaweie.     Sit  Stoway. 

Stoke,  538,  S84,  649-                                ^H 
Stoke  Courcy  a/ioj  Stogutcey                  ^^H 

^H              1465- 

SUwell.     .9«SlowelI. 

^^H          Slane,  Stsnes.     5»  Scone. 

Stawell,  Stauwell.  Adaiti   de, 

(Stokeskurcy.  Stoko),  341.                  ^H 

^^H          Stane.  Cecily,  Ute  wife  of  John 

1288. 

1143,  1387.                                       ^H 

^^H              de  U,  6S6. 
^^H              his  mother.  666. 

Henry  de,   394(0.    422, 

413.  66^7".  iSg.  1491- 

prior  of,  1 145.                                   ^^H 

Stoke  Gilfanl,  7S4,  7S5.                           ^^H 

Ivctte,  wife  of  Payne  de, 

Sloke    Gomer.        Sm     Sto-                 ^^1 

^^M          loMi,  dw%htet  of  Robot 

S5«. 

gumber.                                                 ^H 

Nicholas  de,  1466, 

Stoke  Gregory  (Stokes],  17M.                  ^^H 

512 


INDEX   OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Stoke  Lane  (Stokeling),  315. 
Stoke.  [Pero  ?],  John,  parson 

of,  431. 
Stoke  St.  Mary  (Stokes  next 

Holweie),  383. 
Stoke    St.    Michael   (Mykel- 

stok),  552. 
Stoke  Trister  (Stokes),    139, 

383. 
Stokeling.     See  Stoke  Lane. 

Stokelinz,  David  of,  96. 

Martin  of,  96. 

Stokemore,  Stakemore,  1348, 

1354.  1381. 
Stokes.      See  Stoke    Gregory 

and  Stoke  Trister. 
Stokes     [?     Stoke     Courcy], 

II45- 
Stokwode,  Alice,  daughter  ol 

Rjjbert  de,  549. 

Stone    (Stanes,    Stane),   304, 

656,  1510. 

hundred    of,    385,    pp. 

59>  251- 
Stonithewall,  Robert  de,  953. 

.Stonman,  William,  222,  383. 

Stoway  (Staweic),  burgh    of, 

228,  304,  1 1 56,  p.  xlvii. 
Stowell  (Stawell),  201,  944. 
Strapye,  David,  788. 
Stratton,  698. 
Stratton,     Straton.     Stretton, 

Andrew   de,    382(4/),    444, 

535,  614,  1448. 

Bertha,   wife    of, 

444.  535- 
Henry  de,  569. 

John  de,  698. 

Ru^'cr  de,  1463,  1477. 

William  de,  821. 

Slreech,  Hugh,  415. 

Street  (Strele),  11 14. 

Stretcholt  (Strctheholt,  Strel- 
hold),  500,  nil. 

Strete,  John  ('e  la,  1078. 

Streteholt,  Joan,  wife  of  John 
de,  nil. 

Isabella,  her  daugh- 
ter, ib. 

Strethend,  694. 

Stridebolt,  Ralph,  of  Saun- 
ford. 

Strogain,  William  le,  of 
Bristol,  794. 


Studley  (Stodlegh),  co.  Oxon, 
prioress    of,     1336,     1342, 

1350. 
Siul,  William,  204. 
Sturcs,  John  de,  1434. 

Roger  de,  1434. 

William  de,  1434. 

Sturi,  John,  of  Aimeton,  1005. 
Sturiford,  William  de,  968. 
Stuure,  William,  1 176. 
Stuvard,  Richard  le,  218. 
Subrente.     See  Brent,  South. 
Sub  worth,  Walter  de,  1491. 
Suein,    Sveyn,    Thomas    and 

Isabella,  his  wife,  750,  1 5 12. 
Sukadebir'.        See    Cad  bury, 

South. 
Suleny,        SuUney,        Sulni, 

Sulenny,     Sulini,     Soliny, 

Sullynye,  Andrew  de,  14IS, 

1421. 

Geoflfry  de,  302,  303. 

Hasculf  de,  302. 

Henry  de,  1 265. 

Ralph  de,  302,  422,  425, 

569,  587,  1415,  1421. 
Sulleworthe,  Robert  de    and 

Eva,  his  wife,  1488. 
Sullia,  Walter  de,  28. 
Sullye,    William     de,     1463, 

1478. 
Sumenur,  Adam  le,  1489. 
Sumercot.  William  de,  1346. 
Sumerford,  William  de,  149. 
Sumerton,  Adam,  son  of  Hugh 

de,  892. 

Durand,  382(4^). 

Richard  de,  382(/),  953. 

Sumery,     Sumeri,    Joan    de, 

1336. 
Margery  or  Margaret  de, 

4202s,  TO3,  618,  714. 
Summis,  Henry  de,  644. 
Sunderland,  394. 
Sunderland,  John  de,  394. 
Sunnal,  Simon  le,  604. 
Superton.        See     Petnerlon, 

south. 
Susanna,  a  cloth-seller,  806. 
Sushaldewcll,  1212. 
Sutche  [Zouche],  Alan  la,  783. 
Suthbrente.    See  Brent,  South. 
Suthovere,    Sutever,    Henry, 

1026. 


Suthovere,  Robert  de,  901. 

Roger  de,  1287. 

Thorstan  de,  828. 

Walter,  icxxx 

Sutton,  Agnes  de,  666. 

Ailofde,  382(5«). 

Andrew  de,  701. 

Cecily,  lady  of,  1054. 

Christiana  de,  885. 

Emma   de  and    Ralph, 

her  son,  356. 

Robert  de,  353,  382(5*). 

Stephen  de,  56. 


Sutloo,    182,  316,   353,  356, 

383.411. 
Sutton,  Long  (Sutton),  1454. 

Sutton  Mallett  (Sutton),  884. 

Sutton  Montis  (Sutton),  317, 

953. 

Sveyn.     See  Suein. 

Swell,  1200. 

Swenge,  Richard,  of  Cusington 

(Oisington),  887. 
Swere,  Hugh,  281,  383-5. 
Swete,  William,  299. 
Swete  by  the  bone,  John,  151. 

Sweting. ,  304. 

Swift,  Berinwe,  son  of,  345. 

Nicholas,  604. 

Richard,  377,  383. 

Syfrewast.     See  Sifferwasl. 
Sym',  William,  1497. 
Sytherugg,    Simon    de,    384, 

385. 
Syur,   Roger  le,  of  Cumbe, 

190,  383. 


T. 

Tabeler,  Ralph,  knt.,  74. 
Taile,  Ralph,  son  of  Hubert 

le,  217,  383.  385. 
Tailefer,  Richard,  372. 
Tailor,  Tailur,  Taylur,  Tail- 

lor,  Adam  the,  368. 

-  Albreda,  his  wife, 


368. 


of  Bruton,  243. 


—  Alice,      late      wife      of 
Robert  le,  1320. 

Geoflfry  le,  of  Emeshill, 


219.  383»  385- 

—  Gilbert  the,  1456. 


Tailor,  Hamotlic,  43$. 

Hugh  le,  1463,  1478. 

Lake  the,  1355. 

John  Ihc,  604. 

Ralph  Ihe,  ^,  g|i,  8 

Richard  le,  997. 

Robert  le,  3941/. 

Walter  the,  1456. 

Waiinlhe,  114. 

William  (he,  19a. 

Talebot,  Thalebol,  Eva,  1488. 

GeoRiy,  1488. 

Gilbert,  lijl. 

Laurence,  1488. 

Philip,  591. 

Richard,  38a(f). 

Tampion.     Sie  Taunton. 
Tangley     (TangcEe),    co. 

Southants,  1516. 
Tanner,  Taonur,  Gilbert  the, 

143- 
Henry  the  and  SiSHda, 

fats  wife,  filo. 

Rc^ci  le,  I3l8. 

Taunt OD  (Tan ton,  Tatnpton), 

80,  104,  116.304,  371.383, 

39S.  519.  1076.  1077.  1094. 

1144,  pp.  3,    4,    14,    ig. 

>3S- 


-  burgh  1 


293. 
raior  of,  86,   113,  383, 

1378.  1398.  1413.  V  4S3- 
St.    Mary    Magdalene  s 

chuEch  iti,  1418. 
Waltei,   archdeacon    of. 

See  Saocto  Quiniinu. 
William,  archdeacon  of, 

U65. 

Taunton,  Tanton,  Tatnpton, 

FeUn  de.  384,  3S5. 
Guydc,  1513. 


[liam  te,  596,  1456. 
Telinge,  Richard,  44G. 
Teller,  Thomas  le,  S06. 
Templars,  ihe,  442,  1131. 

street  of,  798. 

Temple,  Master  uf  [he  Knights 

of   the,   4JQ*,    410.4,    509, 

1434- 
Temple  Combe  (Cumbc),  944, 

"434- 
Templo,  Johnde,  3»I. 
Tenesford,  Robert  de,  993,  996. 
Teobald,  Warin,  983. 
Terry,     Terri,     Teri,     Tery, 

Alice,  iate  wife  oF,  S46. 

Thomai,  514,  6*7. 

Walter,  1106, 

and   Juliana,     his 

Willing,  1497. 

Te»sun,  Teshun,  Teysun, 

Hawise.    late    wj/e    of 

Richard  le,  661. 
Nicholas,  archdeacon  of 

Bath,    1297,     1300,     1307. 

1314.  1315.  13JS- 

Stephen,  47S,  Ml- 

Tewkeibiuy,  ixi.   Gloucester, 

p.  3- 
Tcynlrer.     See  Teinteter. 
Thalebot.     Sa  Talebot. 
Thayn.    See  Theyn. 
Thedhayrd,  Adam,  814, 
Therkesbir,  Juhn  de,  310. 
Therry.     Set  Terry. 
Theyn,    Katherine,   iate  wife 

of  William  le,  615. 

—  William  le,  660,  933,  p. 

Tbeyncbir',  William  de,  1207, 

TbieLielhom,  394(4). 

Thike,  John  le.  iai6. 

Thiral,  John,  811. 

Thiwtngbam.  Set  Christ- 
church  Twinebam. 

Thomas,  Alice,  daughter  of, 
7S1. 


Thomas,  Isabella,  late  wife  of 
EUiraid,  son  of.     Sa  Ilil- 

Matilda,    daughter     of, 

S18. 

Osbert,  son  of,  jai. 

Richard,  son  of,  604. 

Thome,      Thomas,      son     vl 

Beatrice.  171a, 
Thomele.  Henry  dc,  I336. 
Thorny,  William  dc,  552, 
Thon.     See  Tone. 
Thurban,  John.  S08. 
Thorc,   Thotrc,   Gervasc   de, 

3«4,  383,  464- 
Thorcl,      Thorald,      Gilbert, 

766. 
Nicholas,   of  KingcJlon, 

962. 

Peter,  760. 

Ri^er,  490. 

J  uliana,    hb    wife, 

490. 
Roesia,  his  former 

wife,  490. 
Roger,   hh  son, 

490. 
William,  of   KJngeston, 

962. 
Thoreny,  Thorevgny,  Tonny, 

Toren',      Toryny,      Torni, 

Tomey,  John  de.  630,  740, 

995.  996,  1038. 

Ralph  de,  348. 

Robert  de,  1033. 

William  de,  looo,  1521. 

Thome,  Tbume,  Adam  de  la, 

57>.  "35- 

Baldwin  de,  1210. 

Gilbert  de,  394(r'),  411. 

Hugh   of   the    mill    of. 


■  Wiiliaro  dc,  1371. 

rne  (Thornor).  497- 

Thorn  Fcalcon  (Tome).  II92. 

Thome  St.  Margaret  (Tome), 

Thorahill,  Koberi  de,  940] 

Thornton,  jS. 

Thorp.  Throp,  Richard  de  Ea, 


S'4 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Thorp,  Walter,  of  Brages,  io6. 
Thorre.     See  Thore. 
Throp.     See  Thorp. 
Thukkeswell.     See  Tukeswell. 
Thurbem,  Adam,  272. 
son    of.        See    Brente, 

Richard. 
Thurkewell,  Peter  de,  548. 

Cp.  TrukewcU. 
Thurkilby,  Roger  de,  pp.  135, 

137,  xviii. 
Thurkill,  Alan,  son  of,  248. 
Thurlok,  Richard,  633. 
Thume.     See  Thome. 
Thurstan,   father   of   Robert, 

.38. 
Tickenham  (Ticheham,  Tiches- 

ham),  18,  40. 
Tifel    Roger,  382(2^). 
Tilly,  Tylly,  TyiUi,  Walter  de, 

304. 
William   de,   421,   422, 

425,  627. 
Tinctor,  Henry,  1092. 

Ralph,  806. 

Walter,  806. 

Tinker,  Robert  le,  1 145. 
Tintenhull,    TintehuU,    Luke 

de,  510. 

Richard  de,  980. 

Robert  de,  633. 

TintinhuU   (TintehiU,    Tinte- 

hill),  304,  1266,  1501,  1504. 

hundred  of,  120,  p.  273. 

Tirz,  Robert,  90. 
Tithingman,     William      the, 

755. 
Tittprest,  Tutprcst,   Richard, 

348,  383. 
Togot,  Walter,  1446. 
Tokeswell.     See  Tukeswell. 
Tokington',  Reginald  de,  76. 
Tollepein,  Thomas,  304. 
Tone,    Adam    in    the,    1423, 

1427. 

(Thon),  river,  11 16. 

Toni,  Reginald,  858. 
Torcn'.     See  Thoreny. 
Toriny,  Toryny.    .SV«  Thoreny. 
Tome.     See  Thome. 
Tomey,  Tomi.     See  Thoreny. 
Toraur,  Ralph  le,  724. 
Torrington      (Tori  ton),      co. 

Devon,  p.  449. 


Tort,  Tortus,  Ralph  le,  223, 

305,  383.  "37. 
William   le,    304,  342, 

593,  "31. 
Tortemanis,      Tortemayns, 

Robert,  22. 

Walter,  853. 

Tot,  Roger  le,  382(4^). 
Totenes,  William  de,  IC94. 
Tracy,     Trascy,     Christiana, 

daughter  of  Roger  de,  410. 

Eva  de,  609. 

John  de,  302. 

Henry  de,  1474,  pp.  424, 

426. 

William  de,  1370. 


Travers,  Gilbert,  377. 

John  de,  1050. 

Travet,  Richard,  1348. 

Trebergh,  Treberge,  Ralph  de, 
1500. 

Richard  de,  519. 

Robert  de,  115, 117,383. 

Tregoz,  John,  857,  1497. 

Robert,  857. 

Treiebat,  Robert,  1083. 

Trendle,  in  Pitminster,  124. 

Trent,  201. 

Tresor,  Nicholas  le,  1 1 12. 

Robert,  924. 

Trevet,  Treveht,  Trivet, 
Ralph,  670,  681,  1059, 
1 107. 

Richard,  446. 

Thomas,  421,  445,  500, 

531,    569,   645.    681,   929, 
1059,  1 145,  1428,  i486. 

Treyberge.     See  Trebergh. 

Trice,  Gervase,  1 261. 

Richard,  1248. 

Triche,  William,  604. 

Trichur,  Walter  le,  oflaStane, 
1020. 

Trin,  Walter  de,  54. 

Tringham,  Agnes  de,  I472. 

Trivet.     See  Trevet. 

Trom,  Thomas  de,  1420. 

Tropinel,  Tropynel,  Robert, 
269,  385. 

Thopacia,  wife  of  Wil- 
liam, 438. 

William,  86,  736. 


Trowbir,  John  de,  1267. 
Trowbridge  (Troubrig*),  1157. 


Trubewel.     See  Nempnet. 
Trukewell,    Peter     de,    339, 

383,  458. 

Cp,  Thurkewell. 

Trull,  William,  1092. 

Trunket,  William,  of  Dray- 
cote,  811. 

Tryl,  John  le,  1498. 

Tubbe,  Roger,  of  Westcumbe- 
lond,  1 23 1. 

Tudenham,  Tudeham,  John 
<ie,  391 »  393,  869. 

Tukeswell.    See  Tuxwell. 

Tukeswell,  Thukkeswell, 
Tokeswell,  Peter  de,  394^, 
427,  1082, 1466. 

Henry,  his  &ther, 

Tumbak,  Robert,  1027. 
Tunayre,    Tunerre,  Tune3nre, 
Hugh.    368,    383,    394(A), 

55',  725. 
Tundreslegh,  Walter  de,  1516. 

Tune,  Robert  de  la,  of  Yatton, 
762. 

Roger,  604. 

Tunemereton,  Roesia  de,  493. 
Tunesende,  Nicholas  de,  1355. 
Tuneyre.     See  Tunerre. 
Turbem,  Walter,  70a 
Turbervill,  Turbevill,  John  de, 

1394,  1396. 

Richard  de  and  Matilda, 

his  wife,  1491. 

Robert  de,  35,  394(7). 

Thomas  de,  35. 

Turgisius ,  299. 

Turlebare,  James  de,  of 
Cusington,  889. 

Tumur,  William  le,  1038. 

Turribus,  Geoffry  de,  420^. 

Turstam,  John,  976. 

Tutling,  Robert,  1506. 

Tutprest.     See  Tittprest. 

Tuxwell,  in  Spaxton  (Tukes- 
well), 394F. 

Twerton    (Twyuerton),    303, 

834. 
Twinhoe,  in  Wellow  (Tynho), 

1471. 
Twuyerton.     See  Twerton. 
Twyuerton,  Alwin  de,  834. 

Augustine  de,  834. 

Alice,  his  wife,  ib. 


INDEX  OF    PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


515 


Tyderington.     See  Tythering* 

ton. 
Tyke,  John  and  Margery,  his 

wife   1362. 
TyUy,  Tyilli.     See  Tilly. 
Tylteme,  470. 
Tylteme,  David  de,  470. 
Tymbberwe,  Thomas  de  and 

Matilda,  his  wife,  488. 
Tymerscumbe,      Tymercume, 

Geoffry  de,  418,  422. 
Tynho.    See  Twinhoe. 
Tynho,  Thomas  de,  147 1. 
Tyrel,  John,  819. 
Roger,  of  Childecump- 

ton,  147 1. 

-  and  Sara,  his  wife. 


652. 


ib. 


the  young,  963. 
Roger,  his    father. 


Tytenhull.     See  Tintenhull. 
Tytherington     (Tyderington), 
1028. 


U. 

Ublev  (Hubbelegh),  960. 
Ukedy,  William,  569. 
Umframwill,         Sybil        de, 

382(3f). 
Upp)ehill,  Upehille,  John,  of 

Mellens,  820. 

Ralph,  1 1 50. 

Ricnard  42or. 

Walter,    of    Almundes* 

worth,  1 140. 
Uppekot,  1289. 
Upton,  John  de,  1521. 
Richard  de,   357,  931, 

963. 
Upton  Noble,  951,  953. 
Usher,  Usser,  John  the,  720. 

Robert  the,  527. 

William  le,  505,  508. 

Uthcinge,  Roger,  447. 


V. 

Vagg,  in  Yeovil  (Waie),  314. 
Val,  Robert  de  la,  1 182. 


Valenc',  William  de  and 
Joan,  his  wife,  1394,  1396. 

Valle,  Robert  de,  394(2). 

Vallet,  Matilda,  late  wife  of 
Richard,  719. 

Valletorta,  Valetorta,  Wale- 
torta,  Joel  de,  382(5/),  77i 
{wrongly  Ivel),  1252,  1 257, 

p.  137. 
John  de,  516,  633. 

Ralph    de,    1394,   1396, 

1413. 
Robert  de,   1394,   1396, 

1413- 
Vallibus,  Dolond  de,  1050. 

Robert  de,  382(2/). 

Ralph  de,  382(3^). 

William  de  and  Alienora, 

his  wife,  I394* 
Vassal,  Geoffry,  492,  598. 
Vauton.     See  Walton. 
Vautur,  Robert  le,  of  Monta- 

cute,  980. 
Vel,  John  le,  604. 
Velata,   Alice,    of   Skilegate, 

1 148. 
Velegh,  Ralph  le,  1151. 
Venur,  Richard  le,  1042. 
Verdon,  Verdun,  Agnes,  late 

wife  of  Thomas  de,  1460. 

Thomas,  1063. 

Vemay,  Henry  de,  1091. 
Vescy,  William  de  and  Agnes, 

his  wife,  1394. 
Veteri     Ponte,     Robert     de, 

382(2^). 
Veyl,  Thomas  le,  1453. 
Vikers,  Henry  le,  394(/). 
Vilers,  Roger  de,  379,  382  (5<i), 

945.  1383.  1384. 
Roger,  his  son,  1384. 

William  de,  964. 

Vilur,  Wilkin  le,  256. 

Vina£,  Robert  le,  1489. 

Vincent,  John,  son  of,  1339. 

Vintner,    Henry    the,     l2(Si, 

1263. 

Richard  the,  569. 

Viresun,  Christiana,  late  wife 

of  Hugh,  725. 
Viscunta,  William  de,  240. 
Vivian,  Vivone,  Vyvun,  Hugh 

de,   355.    383f    39>»  4«)«. 
420/,  964,  1287. 


Vivian,  Robert,  son  of,  44. 
Vobster,  in  MeUs  (Fobbester), 

1022. 
Vrevill^      Isabella,     wife     of 

Nicholas  de,  456. 

Felicia,  her  sister. 

Margery     and 

lolenta,  her  nieces,  456. 
Vynar,  Richard  de,  of  Hare- 

trowe,  458. 
Vyvun.     Su  Vivian. 


W. 

Wabbecumbe,  Peter  de,  339, 

383. 
Wac.     Su  Wake. 

Wace,  James,  671,  963. 

Waddon,  Waddune,  Wedden, 

Henry  de,  382(2^,  425.  587. 
Wade,  Rol^rt,  191. 
Wademore.     See  Wedmore. 
Waie.    See  Vacg. 
Waiford.    See  Wayford. 
Waingeben.    See  Wajrgnoben. 
Wak,  Wake,  Wac,  Andrew, 

1223,  1419,  1516. 

John,  336,  385. 

Ralph,  366,  383. 


William,  1 143. 

Wakewel,  Wakewal,  Walter, 

258. 

William,  194. 

Walcot  (Walekote),  502,  747. 
Waldre^eie,   Waldreresheng 

Adam  de,  218,  383. 
Waleman,  Hugh,  son  of,  83. 
Walerand,     Walleraund 

Robert,    566,    1301,    1303, 

1310.  1327. 

Denise,  his  wife, 

1303,  1 310.  1327,  1330. 
William,  1436. 


Wales.     Su  Waleys. 
Waleton.    See  Walton. 
Waletorta.     See  Valletorta* 
Waleys,  Waleis,  Wales,  Wal- 

lensis,  Adam  le,  337, 394(0, 

42oi\  492,  590. 

Elvas  de,  1029. 

John  le,  79,  nil,  1144. 

Luke  and  Robert,  sons 

of  William,  of  Stawei^  193. 


Si6 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Waleys,  Nicholas  le,  436. 
Waller,  his  father, 

436. 
Ralph  le,  380,  400,  539, 

1181. 

Joan,  wife  of,  380. 

Richard  le,  929. 

Simon  le,  loii. 

Thomas  le,  1 303,  1 502. 

Walter  le,  399. 

William,  309,  314,  383, 


3M. 


1 1 50. 

and  Emma,  his  wife, 

—  and    Nichola,    his 
wife,  380. 

Waling,  Richard,  1 249. 
Walinton.     See  Wellington. 
Walkelin,  Adam,  971. 

Elyas,  475. 

Gervase,  son  of,  412. 

Nicholas,  353. 

Nicholas,  of  Sutton.  316. 

Wall,  Krnisius,  son  of  Agnes 

de  la,  844. 

John  de  la,  1023. 

Richard  de  la,  1023. 

Philip,  his  servant, 

•A 
Wallavington,      Emma      de, 

1428. 
Wallensis.      ^ef  Waleys. 
Walleraund.     See  Walerand. 
Walls,  Stephen,  220. 
Walter,  Alan,  son  of,  1464. 

Cecily,  daughter  of,  460. 

Elwrard,    son    of,    417, 

695. 

G.,  of  Cusinton,  623. 

Gervase,  son  of,  236,  383. 

Goscelin,  son  of,  87. 

-  Ailneth,  his  brother, 


87. 


Henry,  son  of,  465. 
Hubert,   son    of,    1514, 


1524. 


id. 


Walter,  his  brother. 


John,  son  of,  420A,  604. 
Leda,  daughter  of,  525. 
Peter,  son  of,  594. 
Roger,      son     of,     and 


Justine,  his  wife,  698. 
—  Thomas,  son  of,  476. 


Walter,  Walter,  son  of,  662. 
Walton  (Wauton),  730. 
Walton,    Waletoiif     Vanton, 

Wauton,  Alan  de,  408,  990, 

1000,  1521. 

Michael  de,  990. 

Roger  de,  1 294. 

William    de,    14,    22, 

56. 


Amabel,  wife  of,  14, 
19,  20,  22,  56. 

Richard, 


brother  of,  20. 
Walurick,  Adam,  384,  385. 
Wamberge,  Geoffry  de,  prior 

of  Golddyve,  1345. 
Wambestrong,  Hugh,  596. 
Belesor,    his   aunt, 

596. 
Thomas,  his  uncle, 

S96. 
Wanclin,  Roger,  1472. 
Wanci,   Wancy,    Geoffry  de, 

I. 
Robert    de,    330, 

382Cr). 

Wandelestre,  Oliver.  See 
Wanstrow. 

Wandestre.     See  Wanstrow. 

Wanlegh,  near  Barrow 
(Bam we),  93a 

Wanstrow  (Wandestre,  Wan- 
delestre Oliver,  Waun* 
destre),  214,  385,  394/ 
394(/>).  1030. 

Wantune,  Michael  de,  42c. 

Warde,  Matilda,  late  wile  of 
William,  1276. 

Ralph,  1276. 

Ware,  War*,  Wane,  Alfred  la, 

39. 
David  la,  806. 

Godfrey  de  la,  837. 

Hamo  de,  41. 

Christiana,  his  wife, 


41. 


ter,  41. 


Lucy,  her  sis- 
Reinfred,  her 


uncle,  41. 

—  John  la,  1463,  1467. 

—  Jordan  la,  422,  1035. 

—  Nicholas  la,  1 162. 

—  Robert  le,  382(^). 


Ware,  Thomas  de  la,  1296. 
Thomas  le,   of  Stanton, 

261. 
and  Agnes,  his  wife, 

697. 
William  la  or  de,  lOOl, 


1019,  1 145,  1314,  1325, 
Warin,  Robert,  986. 
WarmwuU,  Wennewell,  Wer- 

mill,  Geoffry  de,  510,  528. 
and    Margaret,   his 

wife,  867. 
Warner        the       Warrener, 

Richard,  73. 
Robert,    369,     382(2^), 

382(3^).  383. 

Simon,  64a 

William,  712. 


Waspail,  Godfrey,  251. 
Waspre,  Robert  de,  1 52 1. 
Wasun,  Gur  (w),  80. 

Guy,  92,  loi. 

John,  his  son,  92. 

Ralph,  80. 

Richard,  1456. 


Watchet  (Wascet',  Wechet), 
304,  1 144,  1 150. 

hundred  of,  p.  36. 

Watechet.     See  Wechet. 

Wateleg.     Su  Whatley. 

Walelegh,  Whatelegh,  Nicho- 
las de,  1218. 

Oliver  de,  1218. 

Robert  de,  394(^)t  4a4» 

425,  665. 

Roger  de,  1218. 

Watelens,  Nicholas  de,  8. 
Watere,  Henry  de  la,  598. 

Hugh  de  la,  598. 

William    de  h^   of  the 

Yha  of  Kingeston,  962. 
Watevill,  Ralph  de,  304. 
Wathdon,  Whitdon,  John  de, 

lOQl, 

Waubrige,  844. 
Waugtre,  Robert  le,  1055. 
WaukeUn.    See  Walkelin. 
Waundestre.    Se£  Wanstrow. 
Wauton.    See  Walton. 
WaviU,    Wayvill,    Alexander 
de,  841. 

Richard  de,  1 149. 

Wayder,  Philip  le,  1075. 
Wayford  (Waiford),  218,  385. 


^^                                         INDEX   OF   PERSONS   AND   PLACES.                                  517               1 

Wayfotd,   Waiford,    Baldwin 

Welinton,   Welingdon,  David 

Wells,  Welle,  WeUes,  Ceolfiy 

de.  979.  9*2.  "94- 

de,  150a. 

de.  S*8. 

-^  WUliam  dc,  38l{->:). 

Gilbeil  de,  990. 

John  de,  819. 

WaygDolien,       Waingebra, 

Stephen  de,  473,  508. 

Hubert  oA  1383. 

Peter,  197,  1223, 

Welkestede.  Richard  de,  1346. 

— —   Thomas    dc,    81.  432, 

William,  iaa4. 

Wellencwif,    Walter,    son    of 

117a. 

Waymctham  (in  Conpesbufj), 

Edith.  167. 

Walter  de,  131a.  1384- 

759- 

Welleslabe.  William  <Je.  767. 

—  WiUi»4nde,  1386, 

Wayie,  John  la,  1150, 

Wellcile,  Welesltfi,  Ralph  de. 

Wellon  (Wekhelon.    Welwe- 

Weate  (Wer,  Were],  394("). 

S41,  S». 

lon),  600. 

714,  S47. 

Saveran  de.  365. 

K<«er.  the  miller  of,  989, 

manor  of,  p.  251. 

Waleiaoi  de,  1422,  1426, 

Welwc.     S<e  Wellow. 

Wrarae  (Weme,  in  the  manor 

1436.  UJ7.  M39' 

Welwe,    Thomas,   the    llay- 

ofSumerlon),  167. 

Warin  de,  735- 

ward  of,  998- 

Weaver  ( 7Wiir),  K^inald  the. 

William  de,    399,    436, 

Welwelon.     S«  Wellon. 

604. 

598.  607,  S37,  1253,  1422. 

Welweton.         Welwi^nton, 

Richard  the,  of  Vhaiton, 

Wetlesley,      in      Woraiinstei 

William  de.  394(0.  989- 

755- 

(Weleale).  1436. 1437.  •  438- 

Robert  ihe,  841. 

WellinetOD  (Walinton,  Wetin- 

Wembert.  William,  45. 

Sliholfthe.  iisi. 

hundredof,  1163,  pp.  »7, 

Wenthe,  Robert. 

Waller  the,  795. 

Were,  Geofty    de.  chaplain. 

Waiiatnihe,  1151. 

297. 

149. 

Webbe,  John  le,  n/?. 

Wellisfotd  (Welleford),  1304, 

Rofier  de  U,  1074. 

WiUiam    Ic,    of    Wells, 

13a*,  1443. 

Wercwcll.     Sa  Wherwell. 

1007. 

Wellow    (Welwe.    WeUwei), 

Wering,  William,  410. 

Webbefotd,  Simon  de.  50S. 

hundred    of,    pp.    44, 

Werlam.  John  de,  382IO. 

Webel.^:,  Philip  de,  34?. 
Waleran  de,  347. 

245- 

Wennill,     Sa  WarmwalL 

Wechcford,  Aiiam  de,  [151. 

—  water  of.  833- 

Weme.     5«  Wearoc. 

Wechet.     Su  Waichel. 

Wells  (Welles.  Well'),  p.  iB, 

Werwell,  Benedict  de,  1:36. 

Wei:het,  Aubrey  de,  1150. 

344,   398,  418.    4*2.    530, 

Sampson  de.  1233. 

S30,  S37.  i»73.  1289,  1480, 

Weslden.  John  de,  1003. 
Weslhachc.      Sa     Halch, 

Wedden.     i-«  Waddon. 

burgh  of,  304,   pp.   36. 

Wedmeie,    Wedmote,  Adam 

West. 

de,  806,  1525. 

144. 

Wffitludeford.    Sti    Lydford. 

- —  John  de,  304. 
Kanulph  de,  848. 

hundred  of.  777,  pp.  36, 

West. 

243' 

Westminster.  16.   19.  41,  43, 

Wedmol',  667. 

Hoapilal  of  St.  John's  in, 

46,  53.  S7.  61.  eic. 

WedraorefWademore,  Wedde- 

1480,  1485- 

Weslrain-'ter,  Rolwrtdc,  1307. 

mote),  478,  843. 

Wells,   canons  of,    J4,    735, 

Weslon.  301,  308,  367,  1509. 

Week   Champflower   (Wil«), 

14.16. 

La  Niwelcsc  in,  1*. 

331- 

—^  church  of,  p,  134- 

dean  of,  16.  19.   3o,  34, 

La  Berkeric  in,  ii. 

Week  St.  Lawrence,  153. 729, 

Weton,  Geoflry  dc,  367. 

755. 

73S. 

(laskoyl,  750. 

Wefrich.  Robert,  806. 

Hrniy,  treasurer  of,  1370. 

John,  dean  of,  5S9,  856, 

Richard  de,  382tr),  1283, 

U  ettfoid,  John  de  la,  1038. 

Robert  de.  1315,  1509, 

Wclcy.  Adam  de,  S7i- 

131*.  1365.  '370- 

Roger  dc,  *l. 

Webnd.  Robert,  950. 

Teler,  prior  of,  541. 

Swein  de,  312.     Sa  also 

Weleheton.     5«  Wellon. 

Richard,  bishopof,  [311, 

Daunon,  >on  of. 

Wclesleg.     Sti  Wollesle. 

I33S- 

—  Thomas  de,  1 S09. 

Welclon,  William  de.  383(*). 

Robert,     vicar    of     St. 

Westour.  Henry  de,  of  Lam- 

Welewes.    Stt  Wellow. 

CmhbCTttin,  541. 

port,  373. 

Welifed.  Kalph,  of  Uaunlon, 

William,   chancellor  of, 

Weslover.   in   Drayton  (Wet- 

1143. 

1370. 

lour).  39J. 

5i8 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND   PLACES. 


Westowe,  Westouwe,  Mar- 
gery, wife  of  William  de, 
1 200. 

Gilbert,  her  son,  t^. 


Nicholas  de,  339. 


Westwoode,  Idonea  de,  622. 
Wetheford,    Adam    de,  496, 

543. 
Wetherbergh,     Harding    de, 

300. 
Weye,  William  de  la,  1474. 
Whadden,  Wheteden,  A  vice, 

daughter    of   William    de, 

1457. 
Richard  de,  431. 

Robert  de,  450,  1457. 

Whatekumb,  Peter  de,  568. 

Whatelegh.     See  Watelegh. 

Whatley  (Wateleg),  274,  330. 

Wheddon,       in        Cutcombe 

(Wheleden),  431,  1457. 
Wherwell      (Werewell),      co. 

Hants,    abbess    of,    382(/), 

750. 
Wheteden.        See    Whadden 

attd  Wheddon. 
Whitdon.     See  Wathdon. 
White  Lackington  (Wythlak- 

eton),  599. 
Whiteleg,  Walter  de,  882. 
Whiteoxmead  (Hittokesmede), 

680. 
Whitestone  (Whitstan,  Wyth- 

stan,     Wvtstan),     hundred 

of,  304,  688,  1046,  pp.  55, 

276,  279. 
Whitley    (Withel^,    Whyte- 

legh),  304,  1201. 
hundred  of,  385,  pp.  58, 

254. 
Whitnel   or    North    Wootton 

(Whutton).  882. 
Whitstan.     See  Whitestone. 
Whittokesmede,      Whittukes- 

med,      Whyttokesmede, 

Idonea,  wife  of  Roger,  581, 

582. 

Julia  de,  363. 

Roger  de,  635,  709. 

William,  son   of  Osbert 

de,  363. 
Whutton.     See  Whitnel. 
Whytecirchc.  Wytcherch, 

Richard  de,  1463. 


Whytecirche,  William  de,  1086. 

Whytelegh.     See  WhiUey. 

Whyteng.  Whythand,  Wyt- 
heng,  Wythand,  Wythand, 
Wyting,  Wytwang,  llebert, 

993- 
Juliana,  wife  of  William, 

1492. 

Richard  de,  757. 

Walter,  757,  872. 

William,  716. 

Roger,  451,  501,  537. 


Whythoud,  889. 

Whytlok,    Whythtlak,  John, 

664. 
Walter  and  Christiana, 

his  wife,  462. 
Whytman,  Stephen,  435. 
Wick,  Wiche,   Wike,   Wvka, 

Wyke,  Agnes,  late  wife  of 

Thomas,  357. 

Algar  de  la,  729. 

Robert  and  Roger, 

his  sons,  729. 

-  Abrig,  his  brother, 


729. 

Nicholas,  his  nep- 
hew, 729. 

—  Geoffry  de  la.  565,  60a 

—  Henry  de,  382(2a). 

—  Humphrey  de  la,  6cx>. 
John  de  la,  394(<7),  753, 


754. 


349. 


Philip    de,    331,    332, 


Philippa,    late    wife    of 
Philip  de.  505. 

Richard,  son  of  William 


de,  490. 

—  Roger  de,  1013. 

—  Thomas     de,    71,    115, 

ii7»  383. 

Walter  de,  86,  382(5^), 


394(0.  750.  "21. 
—  William  de  la,  729. 

William  le,  of  Northon, 


771. 
Wicking,  Wicun,  John,  445. 

William.  383. 

Widcombe(Widecumbe),  385, 

394(?). 
W  idecumb,  Wydecumbe,  John 

de,  1065. 
Philip  de,  1291. 


Widcworth,  Wydewurlh, 

William  de,    382(3*),   650, 

981,  1229. 
Wigborough     (Wiggeberg), 

212,  385,  1228. 
Wike.      See   Week    Champ- 

flower     and      Week     St. 

Lawrence. 
Wikeburg,  Solomon  de,  8. 
Wikere.    See  Wykere. 
WildemareLs,  294. 
Wildrigal,  William,  1355. 
Wilescumb,  Matilda  de,  722. 
Wiling,      Wlleng.      Thomas, 

iaXhsx  of  John,  34. 

William,  123. 

William,  Adam,  son  of,  579, 

p.  133. 

Giilv  and  Joan,  daugh- 
ters of,  064. 

David,  son  of,  341. 

Edith,  daughter  of,  838. 

Elias,  son  of,  27. 

father  of  Thomas,  5. 

Henry,  son  of,  I  lOO. 

James,  son  of,  648. 

Juliana,  daughter  of,  474. 

Martin,  son  of,  382(5/). 

Michael,  son  of,  1294. 

Osbert,  son  of,  p.  133. 

Payne,  son  of,  945. 

Richard,  son  of,  62,  762, 

1218,  1446. 

Robert,  son  of,  9,  305, 


383^.  425. 

—  Thomas,   son    of.       See 
Harptree. 

—  Thomas,    son    of  John, 
son  of,  149. 

—  Walter,  son  of,  12. 
Cicely,  wife  of,  12. 


—  William,  son  of,  575, 
676,  1218.  1388, 1447.  HSif 
1463. 

the3rounger,  145 1. 


WilUton  (Wileton,  Widiton), 

304.385.  "44. 
hundred  of,  p.  43. 

manor  of,  p.  300. 

Wilmersham,  near  Porlock 
(Wymmersham),  1 138. 

Wiltesir*,  Wylteschir,  Nicho- 
las de,  I. 

Robert  de.  1016. 


INDEX  OF  PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


519 


Wilton,    CO.   Wilts.,    115,  p. 

?59. 
Wimare, ,  61. 

Wincanton    (Wykalton,    Wy- 

kauelton),  960,  971,   1 371, 

1417. 
Winchester     (Winton),     380, 

382,  p.  367. 
bishop     of,     132,     371, 

382(*),  S94{r). 

bailif&  of,  122. 

constable        of, 

132. 

prior  of  St.  Swithin's  in. 


382(4/),  420(f),  492»   590* 

778. 

Windesores,  Windlesor,  Ag- 
nes de,  382(5^). 

William  de,  527. 

Winesham,  Ralph  de,  8. 

Winford  (Wincford,  Wym- 
fred,  Wyncsford,  Wynfrod), 
1251,  1423,  1427,  1446. 

Richard,  vicar  of,  1423, 

1427. 
Winger,  Richard,  of  Oterford, 

1(87. 
Winkauelton,     Godfrey     de, 

476. 
Winscombe  (Wynescumbe),  la 

Sute  of,  772. 
Wintcrbum,         Wynterbum, 

Geofiir  de,  429. 

Robert  de,  394(>&). 

Winterstoke        (Wintestok*), 

152,  304,  783. 
hundred  of,  817,  pp.  38, 

232,  233. 
Winton,  John  de,  1482. 

Thomas  de,  349. 

Winton.    Su  Winchester. 
Wistler,  Osbert  le,  of  Chew, 

765. 
Witcombe,     near    Tintinhull 

(Wynchecombe),  iSoi> 

1504. 
Witcombe,  in  Martock  ( Wythi- 

cumbe),  1066. 
Witefeld',    William    de    and 

Matilda,  his  wife,  42. 
Witham     (Wytteham),     Car- 
thusian house  of,  1 521. 
Withele,  Roger  de,  304. 
Witheleg.    See  Whitley. 


Withycombe       (Withicumbe, 
Wydikumb),      225,       577, 

1 132. 
Witloc,  John,  722. 
Wiveliscombe    (Wiveles- 

cumbe),  manor  of,  p.  38. 
Wlf.     SeeWolt 
WUeng,  34. 
Wlmerston.        See    Wolmsur- 

ston. 
Wlward.     See  Wulward. 
Wlwin,  Walter,  1086,  p.  xxxi. 
Wmblegh,  "ad  Pontem  de," 

p.  444. 

Woburi,  Robert  de,  1517. 

Wode .     See  Wood. 

Wode,  John  de  la,  1023. 
Wodebergh.      See   Woodbar- 

row. 
Wodebrig,    Wodebrug,   Alan 

de  la,  940,  1463. 
Wodeford,  Henry  de,  588. 
Scholastica,     his 

sister,  588. 

Luke  de,  800. 

Thomas  de,  1482. 


Wodereve,  Woderove,  Ralph, 

1456. 

Robert,  180. 

Wodeton,     Wudeton,    Adam 

de,  510,  528,  1347. 
Wodewyk,  Benedict  de,  750. 

Felise  de,  746. 

Wodheved,  Edward  de,  1029. 
Wodie,  Wody,  Ivo,  572. 

Reginald,  946. 

Woding,  William,  11 50. 
Wodward,    William,   son    of, 

181. 
Alwina,  his  mother, 

181. 
Wolbold,    Wulbold,    Robert, 

403,  425,  626. 

Roger,  700. 

Woleton  [?  Walton],  241. 
Wolf,  Wlf,  Adam,  of  Briges, 

922. 

Geoffry  the,  569. 

Wolferston.     See  Woolston. 
Wolfarstone,    Goldeburg    de, 

1424. 
Wolbaumton,  Ralph  de,  294. 
Wolmarston,       Wolmereston, 

Wlmerston,     Geoffiy     de. 


627,     1 128,     1348,     1354, 

1381. 

Robert  de,  1462. 


Wolton,  Eudes  de,  236,  238, 
240. 

Wolwardeston.  See  Wool- 
ston. 

Woodbarrow,  in  Wellow 
(Wodeberg).  836. 

Woodecoc,  Wudecoc,  Wude- 
cot,  Gilbert,  181,  383. 

Richard,  181,  383. 

Roger,  129,  383. 

Edith,  wife  of,  129. 

Woodland  (Wodelande),  383. 

Woodstock  (Wodest*),  co. 
Oxon.  409. 

Wood  wick  ( Wodewyk),  church 
of,  746. 

Woolston,  in  Bicknoller 
(Wolfarston,  Wolwardes- 
ton), 294,  715,  1424. 

Wootton  (Wotton,  Wytton), 
434»  586,  1287. 

Worhes,  Margery,  daughter  of 
Johnde,  471. 

Worle  (Worlegh,  Wurle),  152, 
716,  1434. 

Worspringe,  769. 

Worth    (Wurthe),    41,    626, 

770,  I373f  1389- 
Worth,  Wurth,  EUas  de,  572. 

Emma,    late     wife     of 

Philip     de,      1373,     1389, 

1407. 

John  de  la,  of  Wynes- 


ford,  1097. 

Margery  de  la,  572. 

Ricimrd  de,  1293. 

Roger  de  la,  1218. 

Worthie, ,  345. 

Worthull,    Henry    de,    761, 

762. 
Worthy,  William  de,  579. 
Wotton.     See  Wootton. 
Wotton,  Wotedon,  Robert  de, 

431,  1287. 
Wrazall  (Wrokishal),  651. 
Wreye,  William,  384,  385. 
Wrige,   Hamo,   of  Diggenes- 

cove,  235.  238,  240. 
Wrington  (Wrinatone,  Wrinc- 

tone),  152,  284,  304,  550, 

605. 


520 


INDEX  OF   PERSONS  AND  PLACES. 


Wrington,  manor  of,  1062. 
hundred    of,    2S4,    p. 

27. 
Wrington,  Agnes,  daughter  of 

P.  de,  394. 
Writer,  Walter  the,  819. 
Writhelington,     Stephen    de, 

328, 
Writhlington,  837. 
Wrokishaie.    See  Wrazall. 
Wrotham.  prior  of,  p.  136. 
Wrotham,    Richard    de,   391^, 

533.  646,  973,  1037,  1098, 

1 128.  1 134,  1490. 
Wroxal,  Wrockeshale,  Wrokes- 

haie,  Benedict  de,  382(4r). 

Richard  de,  1456. 

Wales  or  Ewales  de,  358, 

367,  383. 
Wrthile.  394(>t). 
Wuallibus.     See  Vallibos. 
Wudecoc,  Wudecot.    See 

Woodcoc. 
Wudeton.     See  Wodeton. 
Wuhtton,  David  de,  882. 
Wulbold.     See  Wolbold. 
Wulward,    Wlward,    Geoffry 

de,  I047»  1050- 

William,  son  of,  65. 

Wurle.     See  Worle. 
Wurthe.     See  Worth. 
Wycestre,     William    de,     p. 

425. 
Wycombe      (Wicumb),      co. 

Buckingham,  p.  126. 
Wydecumbe.        See      Wide- 

cumb. 
Wydewurth,  Wydiworth.     See 

Wideworth. 
Wydom,  Robert,  1365. 
Wye,  Robert  de  la,  770. 
Wygod,  Robert,  1053. 
Wygom,  Robert  de,  1147. 
Wykalton,    Wykauelton.     Set 

Wincanton. 
Wyke,  manor  of,  505. 
Wykere,  Wikcrc,  Walter  le, 

207,  383. 
Wyld,  William  le,  794,  835. 
Wylecok,  William,  1506. 
Wyleghe.     See  Wyly. 
Wylminedon,     Matilda,    late 

wife  of  Robert  de,  916. 
Wylteschir*.    6>.f  Wiltesir*. 


Wyly,   Wyleghe,  Geoflfry  de, 

4SO.  473- 
Wymfred.     See  WinfonL 

Wynb*vill,  Roger  de,  392. 

Wynchalse,  >^^lliam  and 
Cicely  de,  824. 

Wynchecombe.  See  Wit- 
combe. 

Wyne,  John,  of  Clive,  755. 

William  de,  572. 

Wynemeresham,       Ivo      de, 

3«4. 
Wynerton  [?Milverton],  church 

of,  1322. 
Michael,      vicar     of, 

1322. 
Wynescumbe.        See     T^^ns- 

combe. 
Wynesford.    Su  Winford. 
Wynfrod.     See  Winford. 
Wynkelscumbe,    Richard    de, 

878. 
Wynterbum.        See    Winter- 
bum. 
Wynton.     See  Winton. 
Wyppe,  Robert,  1151. 
Wyrecestre,  Robert  de,  624. 
Wyschard,  Robert,  11 50. 
Wysdom,  Geoifry,  1 102. 

Hugh,  of  Kary,  1371. 

Wyse,    Wys,    Adun    le,    of 

Jottesham,  1020. 

Roger,  of  Merk,  567. 

Walter,  731. 

Wytcherch.    See  Whjrtediche. 
Wytecote,  Margery,  daughter 

of  Aline,  848. 
Wytewell,  Richard  de,  1357. 

Thomas,  901. 

Wythand,      Wytheng.       See 

WTiyteng. 
Wyther,  Adam,  839. 
Wytherton,  Robert  de,  142^. 
Wythicumbe.    See  Witcombe. 
Wythlakcton.       See     White 

Lackington. 
Wythston.     See  Whitestone. 
Wyting.     See  Whjrteng. 
Wytstan.     See  Whitestone. 
Wytteham.    See  Witham. 
Wyttlakeford,      Robert      de, 

1330. 
Wytton.     See  Wootton. 

Wytwang.    Su  Whyteog. 


Y. 

Ya,  Alexander  de,  1475. 

Robert  de,  1475. 

Yalperug,  Richard,  1143. 
Yarlington  (Gerlinton,  Jerlin- 

ton),  232,  385,  965. 

John,  the  cobbler  of,  965. 

Yamneld    (Emefeud,    Gerne- 

fcld),  383,  1521. 
Yatton      (Japton,      Yhatton, 

Ghyatton,     Jatton'),     152, 

420,  755,  872. 

hundred  oi^  pp.  39,  239. 

Yatton,     John     de,     1359^1 

1361. 
Luke,  brother  of  John 

the  chaplain  of,  762. 

Silvester  of,  762. 

Yeovil  (Givele,  Givle),    27S, 

282,  293. 
Richard,  the  chaplain  of, 

865. 

water  of,  892. 

Yerild,  Richard,  son  of,  281. 
Yhadefeime,  William  de,  748. 
YlleberL     See  Ilebert. 
Young     {/uvenis),     Anketil, 

382(31;). 
Edith,     late     wife     of 

Gilbert,  1506. 
Geoffry,  of  Keynesham, 

913. 
Gilbert,  92a 

John,  382(5^),  1099. 

Reginald  the,  1207. 

Ridiard,  572,  819,  971. 

Richard,  of  Legh,  loio. 

Robert,  164. 

Thomas,  806. 

Walter,  of  La  Yha,  of 

Kingeston,  962. 

William,  304,  732,  971. 

son  of  John,  477. 

of  Ramescumbe,  1 139. 

Yurda,  Thomas  de  la,  382(5^). 
Yvelcestre.    See  Ilchester. 
Ywelaund  or  Ylbelaund, 

church  of  [perk.  Albalanda, 

f./.,  Whitland],  785. 

Z. 

Zouche.    See  Sutche. 


HARRISON  AND  SONS,   PRINTERS  IN  ORDINARY  TO  HSR  MAJESTY,  ST.   MARTIN's  LANS. 


iT- 


^■s       ^     ^ 


r 


I 


L»  "''j