Our Legal Heritage: King AEthelbert - King George III, 600 A.D. - 1776: June 2011 (Sixth) EditionReilly, S. A.
History
Our Legal Heritage: King AEthelbert - King George III, 600 A.D. - 1776: June 2011 (Sixth) Edition
Reilly, S. A.
Law -- England -- History
This is the suit of Richard of Sudbury: [there follow the names, but
only of 10 men] against the countess Amice who was the countess of
Clare, concerning whom he had complained concerning a novel disseisin of
his free tenement in Sudbury. She said that by judgment of her court for
default of warranty which he had vouched did she make the [dis]seisin
and thereof did she produce suit. And he denied against her and against
the suit, and law was adjudged. And he comes with his law and makes it
with the abovesaid suit. Therefore it is considered that he recover
thereof his seisin; let the countess be in mercy for unjust disseisin
and also her men, of whom the same Richard has complained. And let the
same countess return to him the damages done thereof by a jury of
law-worthy men of the vicinity. The names of the men of the countess are
in the writ.
A sample of crown pleas in several hundreds or wapentakes [Danish name
for a hundred] from 1201 to 1203 are:
1. Denise, who was wife to Anthony, appeals Nicholas Kam of the death
of Anthony, her husband, for that he wickedly slew her husband; and this
she offers to prove against him under award of the court. And Nicholas
defends all of it. It is considered that Denise's appeal is null, for in
it she does not say that she saw the deed. The jurors being asked, say
that they suspect him of it; the whole county likewise suspects him. Let
him purge himself by water [ordeal] under the Assize. He has waged his
law.
2. William de Ros appeals Ailward Bere, Roger Bald, Robert Merchant,
and Nicholas Parmenter, for that they came to his house and wickedly in
the king's peace took away from him a certain villein of his whom he
kept in chains because he wished to run away, and led him off, and in
robbery carried away his wife's coffer with one mark of silver and other
chattels; and this he offers to prove by his son, Robert de Ros, who saw
it. And Ailward and the others have come and defended the felony,
robbery, and breach of the king's peace, and say that (as the custom is
in Cornwall) Roger of Prideaux, by the sheriff's orders, caused twelve
men to come together and make oath about the said villein, whether he
was the king's villein or William's and it was found that he was the
king's villein, so the said Roger the serjeant demanded that [William]
should surrender him, and he refused, so [Roger] sent to the sheriff,
who then sent to deliver [the villein], who, however, had escaped and
was not to be found, and William makes this appeal because he wishes
to keep the chattels of Thomas [the villein], to wit, two oxen, one cow,
one mare, two pigs, nine sheep, eleven goats. And that this is so
the jurors testify. Judgment: William and Robert in mercy for the false
claim. William's amercement, a half-mark. Robert's amercement, a
half-mark. Pledge for the mark, Warin, Robert's son. Let the king have
his chattels from William. Pledge for the chattels, Richard, Hervey's
son.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account