“This is the final agreement made in the Court of the Lord King at
Westminster, on the Friday next after the ascension of our Lord, in
the thirty-first year of the reign of King Henry the second, before
J. Bishop of Norwich, Ralph de Granville the Lord King’s
Justiciaries, and Richard the Treasurer, and Godfrey de Lucie, and
Hubert Walter, and William Basset, and Nigel son of Alexander, and
other faithful lieges of the King being then and there present;
between Walter Abbot of Westminster, and Richard and William of
Padinton, brothers, touching the entire tenement which they held in
Padinton, of the Church of Westminster. Whereupon it was pleaded
between them in the Court of the Lord King, namely, that the
aforesaid Richard and William have quit-claimed (given up) for ever,
for themselves and all their successors and heirs, all and the
aforesaid tenement, and whatever right they had therein, without any
reserve, to the aforesaid Church of Westminster and the Abbot, and
have restored to him the land with all its appurtenances: and for
this resignation, the Abbot aforesaid hath given to them forty marks
of silver and four allowances or maintenances, “conrediæ,” in the
Church of Westminster, two of which are for the service of the
aforesaid Richard and William for the twelve following years, and the
other two are for the service of the wives of the aforesaid Richard
and William, together with gratuities, “caritatibus,” and pittances
so long as the same women shall live.”
Maddox adds that this document “has at the top, the letters, Chiographum,
very large ones, cut through indent-wise.”
We are not informed by this instrument what was “the extent of the entire
tenement,” thus sold to the Abbot of Westminster. But it will be
observed, that the land purchased of Richard and William is said to have
been held by them “of the Church of Westminster.” From which we might
imagine, that the lordship of the soil, had been already legally
appropriated to St. Peter, did we not know that it is equally probable,
that one of the tricks of the time had been played off, to lessen the
risk of the purchased land being forfeited to the Crown.
Blackstone tells us that when a tenant—and all were tenants now, either
of the King, or some other lord,—wished to alienate his lands to a
religious house, he first conveyed them to the house, and instantly took
them back again, “to hold as tenant to the monastery.” This
instantaneous seisin, he further informs us, did not occasion forfeiture:
and, this fact being accomplished, “by pretext of some other forfeiture,
surrender, or escheat, the society entered into those lands in right of
such their newly acquired signiory, as immediate lords of the fee.” {13}
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account