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
17. Roger of Wick [was] appealed of the death of Brictmer by the appeal
of Hawise, Brictmer's wife, and was captured in flight, as say John of
Winielton and Ralph of Mertherin, but the flight is not testified by the
hundred. Kerier [hundred] says the same. Penwith [hundred] says the
same. So is considered that he purge himself by water. He is purged.
Roger's pledges: Ralph of Trelew, Ogier of Kurnick, Richard, Simon's
son, Alfred Malvoisin, Everwin of Lande, John of Kewerion, Warin of
Tiwardeni, Baldwin Tirel, Roger of Trevithow, John of Glin, William
of Dunham, Thomas, Osbert's son.
18. Richard, William's son, appealed Luke, Richard's son, and William,
the servant of Alan Clerk, of robbery and of binding him. The appellees
have not come nor essoined themselves. The county together with the
wapentake says that they were appealed, not of the king's peace, but of
the sheriff's peace, so that the suit was and is in the county [court],
and therefore they were not attached to come before the justices.
Therefore the jurors are in mercy for presenting what they ought not to
have presented.
19. William, Hawise's son, appeals Richard, son of Robert of Somercotes,
for that he came in the king's peace to his house at Somercotes, and
broke his house and robbed him of.[an abrasion] shillings, and a cape
and surcoat, and twenty-five fowls, and twenty shillings worth of corn
[grain], and wounded him in the head with the wound that he shows; and
this he offers to prove against him as the court shall consider etc. And
Richard comes and defends the breach of the king's peace and the
housebreaking, wounding and robbery, but confesses that he came to a
certain house, which William asserts to be his [William's], as to his
[Richard's] own proper house, which escheated into his hand on the death
of Roger his villein, and there he took certain chattels which were his
villein's and which on his villein's death were his [Richard's] own:
to wit, five thraves of oats, thirteen sheaves of barley, and
twenty-five fowls; and he offers the king twenty shillings for an
inquest [to find] whether this be so or no. And William says that
Richard says this unjustly, for the said Roger never had that house nor
dwelt therein, nor were those chattels Roger's, but he [William] held
that house as his own, and the chattels there seized were his. The
jurors being questioned whether Roger did thus hold the house of Richard
in villeinage, say, Yes. Also the coroners and the whole county testify
that [William] never showed any wound until now; and the wound that he
now shows is of recent date. Therefore it is considered that the appeal
is null, and let Richard go quit, and William be in mercy for his false
claim. Pledges for the amercement, Gilbert, Robert's son, and Richard,
Haldeng'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