“The King to the Sheriff, Health. Summon, by good Summoners, _N._ the Son and Heir of _E._ that he be before me, or my Justices, on such a day, to warrant to _A._ who was the Wife of the said _E._ his Father, one Hyde of Land in such a Vill, which she claims to belong to her reasonable Dower of the Gift of the said _E._ her Husband, against _N._ and of which there is a Suit between them in my Court, if he will warrant that Land; or to shew to her why he ought not to do so. And have there &c. Witness &c.” CHAP. X. Should the Heir, after having been summoned, neither appear, nor essoin himself, on the first, second, nor third day; or if, after having cast the usual Essoins, he should on the fourth day, neither appear nor send his Attorney, it may be a question, by what means he ought or can be distrained, consistently with the Law and Custom of the Realm. In the opinion of some, his appearance in Court, shall be compelled, by distraining his Fee.[177] [Footnote 177: He may, according to the Regiam Majestatem, be distrained, or attached by Pledges. (L. 2. c. 16.)] And that, therefore, by the direction of the Court so much of his Fee[178] shall be taken into the King’s hands as may be necessary to distrain him to appear in Court to shew, whether he ought to warrant the Land in question or not. Whilst others[179] think, that his appearance in Court for such purpose may be effected, by attaching him by Pledges. [Footnote 178: _Feodum._ This word, which has frequently occurred in our progress through Glanville, has given the name to a system. The reader has no doubt perused Mr. Justice Blackstone’s account of it, (2 Comm. 44.) and the luminous Annotation which Mr. Butler has subjoined to Co. Litt. (Note to 199. a.) It may not be amiss briefly to mention the leading divisions of Feuds, as the Reader in the course of these pages will find some of these divisions mentioned, and others alluded to. 1. _In proprium et Improprium._ 2. _In francum et non francum._ 3. _In masculinum et femininum._ 4. _In reale et personale._ 5. _In laicum et ecclesiasticum._ 6. _In antiquum et novum._ 7. _In nobile et ignobile._ 8. _In ligium et non ligium._ 9. _In simplex et conditionatum._ 10. _In divisibile et Indivisibile._ (Craig de Jur. Feud. _sparsim_.)] [Footnote 179: Namely, says Dr. Milles’s MS. Hugh Bardolph.] CHAP. XI. When, at last, the Heir of the Husband of the Woman, the complainant, appear in Court, either he will affirm the fact, and concede that the Land in question appertains to the Dower of the Woman, and that she was endowed of it, and that his Ancestor at the time he endowed her was seised of it as an appurtenant to the Land which he named in chief, as her Dower, or, he will deny it. If the Heir admit this in Court, he shall then be bound to recover the Land against the Tenant, if he be disposed to dispute the matter, and then deliver it to the woman; and thus the contest will be changed into one between the Tenant and the Heir.