Our Legal Heritage: The First Thousand Years: 600 - 1600: King Aethelbert - Queen ElizabethReilly, S. A.
History
Our Legal Heritage: The First Thousand Years: 600 - 1600: King Aethelbert - Queen Elizabeth
Reilly, S. A.
Law -- England -- History
Some statutes applied only to Kent County, which had a unique
position between London and the continent. One could sell or
give away his land without the consent of one's lord. The
services of the land, however, could only be sold to the chief
lord. Inheritance of land was to all sons by equal portions, and
if there were no sons, then to all daughters in equal portions.
The eldest brother has his choice of portion, then the next
oldest, etc. The goods of a deceased person were divided into
three parts after his funeral expenses and debts were paid. One
third went to the surviving spouse. One third went to the
deceased's sons and daughters. One third could be disposed by
will of the decedent. If there were no children, one half went
to the spouse and one half went according to will. If an heir
was under 15 years old, his next of kin to whom inheritance
could not descend was to be his guardian. A wife who remarried or
bore a child lost her dower land. A husband lost his dower if he
remarried. If a tenant withheld rent or services, his lord could
seek award of court to find distress on his tenement and if he
could find none, he could take the tenement for a year and a day
in his hands without manuring it. It the tenant paid up in this
time, he got the tenement back. If he didn't within a year and a
day, however, the lord could manure the land. A felon forfeited
his life and his goods, but not his lands or tenements. A wife
of a felon had the dower of one half or her husband's lands and
tenements.
The common law recognized the tort of false imprisonment if a man
arrested as a felon, a person who was not a felon.
Ecclesiastical courts were successful in their competition with
the secular courts for jurisdiction over testamentary
[concerning wills] and succession [no will] to chattels. It's
law made a woman's chattels the property of her husband upon
marriage. She also lost all power over her land during marriage.
A husband became liable for his wife's torts. Promises under
oath were not recognized for married women.
Land may not be alienated to religious bodies in such a way that
it would cease to render its due service to the King.
Judicial Procedure
The writ of Quo Warranto [by what right] is created, by which all
landholders exercising jurisdictions must bring their ancestors'
charters before a justice in eyre for the Common Pleas for
examination and interpretation as to whether they were going
beyond their charters and infringing upon the jurisdiction of
the Royal Court. As a result, many manor courts were confined to
seigneurial matters and could no longer view frankpledge or hear
criminal cases, which were reserved for the royal courts. In the
manor courts which retained criminal jurisdiction, there was a
reassertion of the obligation to have present a royal coroner,
whose duty it was to see that royal rights were not infringed and
that the goods of felons were given to the Crown and not kept
by the lords.
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