« AnteriorContinuar »
A.D. 1340. messuages and 40 acres of land, and afterwards you say that W. de Sutton succeeded to those two messuages and that land by descent from one J. Sutton; but you do not show that J. Pycot devested himself thereof; then suppose that he was disseised of the messuages and land to which &c, and brought the Darrein Presentment against the person who disseised him or some other who entered by the disseisor, I say that he would deraign the presentation—Thoiye. Certainly he would not; for when an advowsou is appendant, whoever is seised of the gross shall have the presentation. — WllXOUGHBY rehearsed the whole plea, and the King's title. And (said he) because you have not denied that J. Pycot presented as appendant &c, or the rest of the King's title, save the alienation which you traversed and which we have of record by the fine, and to avoid the fine you have offered an averment that another was seised, which you have not proved by a presentation, and you have not shown that any one has since become the King's tenant with his license, therefore it seems to us that the averment against the fine which the King shows is not admissible; wherefore sue a writ to the Bishop for the King.
Assise of (11) § Assise of Novel Disseisin, in respect of teneDiTseisin. ments in West Camel, before Scharshulle in the country.—The plaint was in respect of land and rent.— The tenant of the land,1 by bailiff, pleaded that he recovered the same tenements, and thus he was seised without tort; and another answered as tenant of parcel of the land put in view, out of which the plaintiff supposed the rent to issue, and pleaded in bar of the assise. — And the plaintiff, because he saw that he would have been delayed of the assise by the plea of him who pleaded in bar, on this day abridged his plaint for the rent; wherefore the assise was awarded
1 John " de Urtiaco," as appears by the record. See the other report of thii case printed below.
et xl . acres de terre, et pus dites qe W. de Suttone A.D. 1340.
avient a ceux ij mesuages et terre par descente dun
J. Suttone; mes vous ne moustres pas qe J. Pycot1
se deinyst de ceo; donqes jeo pose qil fust disseisi del
mesuages et terre a qi &c., et il porte la dareine pre
sentement vers celui qe lavoit disseisi ou autre qen
trast par le disseisour, jeo die qil derenerast le pre
sentement. — Thorpe. Certes noun freit; qar quant
avoesoun est apendant, qi qe est seisi del groos avera
le presentement. — Wilby rehercea tout le plee, et le
title le Roi. Et pur ceo qe vous navez pas dedit qe
J. Pycot1 ne presenta come apendant &c. ne le reme
nant del title le Roi, sauf lalienacion quel vous tra
versastes, quel nous avoms de record par la fyne, et
en voidance de la fyne avez tendu un averement pur
ceqe autre fust seisi, quele chose vous navez pas prove
par presentement, ne qascun puis soit devenu tenant
le Roi par son conge, par quei nous semble qe lavere
ment contre la fyne qe le Roi mostre nest pas resceiv
able par quei suez bref al Evesqe pur le Roi.
(11.)* § Assise [de] novele disseisine de tenementz Assisa en West Camel devant Sch. en pais.—La pleinte fust DisIeUina: de terre et rente.— Le tenant de la terre par baillif [uLi.Ass. pleda qil recoveri mesmes les tenementz, issi est il seisi sanz tort; et lautre respondi come tenant de PUint,s.] parcelle de la terre mys en vewe dont il suppose la rente [issir], et pleda en barre dassise.— Et pur ceo qe le pleintif vit qe par le plee celui qe pleda en barre il ust este delaie del assise, a cel journe il abregea sa pleinte de la rente; par quei lassise fust
2 From T. alone as far as the point at which the larger type ends, but corrected by the record Placita de Banco, Easter, 14 Edward III., R°. 71. It there appears that the as
sise was brought by Robert Fitz-
AJ). 1840. in respect of the land. Thereupon it was found that the tenant brought a Cui in vita,1 in the time of the King the father of the present King, in respect of the same tenements, against Walter de Thorahull and Margery his wife, and that, pending the writ, the King demised,2 wherefore the parol demurred without day. And while the parol was without day Walter de Thornhull and Margery enfeoffed the plaintiffs, and afterwards he sued a resummons against Walter de Thornhull and Margery in the time of the present King; process was continued until he recovered. And the jurors of the Assise said that he had a right to recover. They were asked how they knew this; and they said by the .summons, and by the view, and by the delivery of seism by the Sheriff — Scharshulle :—The Assise has expressly
1 Technically the action must have been a Sur cui in vita, as the Cui in vita lay only for the widow who had been unable to sue during her husband's life.
2 The words of the record relating to the deposition of Edward II. uppear to be worth quoting :—" de "regimine regni sui se demitit."
agarde de la terre. Par quei trove fust qe le tenaunt A.D. 1340 porta un Cui in vita, en temps le Roi pere le Roi qor est, de mesmes les tenementz, vers Wauter de Thornhull et Margerie1 sa femme et pendant le bref le Roi se demyst, par quei la parole demura sanz jour Et qaunt la parole fust sanz jour Wauter de Thornhull et Margerie1 fefferent les pleintifs, et pus suyst resomons vers Wauter de Thornhull et Margerie, en temps le Roi qor est; proces continue tanqil recoveri. Et disoint qil avoit dreit a recoverir. Demande fust coment ils savoint de ceste chose; il disoint par la somons et par la vewe et par la livere le Vicounte.2 — Sch. Lassise ad expressement dist qe
1 These names are from the record. In T. the letters A. and B. are substituted. The Sur cui in vita was brought on the ground that Walter and Margery had not entry, but after the demise which Henry " de Urtiaco," formerly husband of Sabina "de Urtiaco," great-grandmother of the defendant John, made to Brian de Goinz and Mabel his wife.
2 The interrogation of the jurors as to their remarkable finding of this matter of record appears thus in the Placita de Banco :—" Jura"tores quajsiti per Justiciaries per "quod sciverunt quod tale placitum "fuit in Curia domini Regis patris "domini Regis nunc, et quod tale "judicium redditum fuit in Curia "domini Regis nunc, ex quo pla"cita et judicia Curia: domini "Regis sunt de recordo et mere "extra notitiam et cognitionem "jurats! patrise, qui dixerunt quod "non habuerunt aliquam certam "notitiam sen cognitionem quod •' tale placitum sen judicium fuit "in Curia domini Regis nee asser"tive dicere voluerunt quod hu
jusmodi placitum fuit inter partes
1 qusesiti si voluerunt dicere an
1 quod aliquod aliud veredictum
: Justiciariormu. Juratores quscsiti
1 deberct, ct quantum pradicta
1 tenementa valent per anuum, qui
A.D. 1340. said that the plaintiffs were seised by feoffment and were ousted; and what they say about a recovery does not lie within their cognisance, nor is it a matter upon which there can be an Attaint; wherefore &c.—Whereupon they were adjourned before the same Justices at Westminster; and then they brought the record sub pede dgilli. And then Farning said that the verdict was good, and that in such a case the Justices ought to adjourn the parties into the Bench so that they could be informed whether there was such a record, and, in case there was such a record, to award that the plaintiff should take nothing, and, in case there was none, to adjudge a disseisin.—Afterwards Scharshulle adjourned them into the Bench, for there was diversity between the two vills—between the vill where the plaint is now made and the vill where the recovery was had by the Cui in vita; for the plaint is "of his free"hold in West Camel," and the record proves the recovery to be of tenements in Dunhead nigh West Camel; but the Assise had said that it was one and the same tenement, for Dunhead is a hamlet of West Camel.— Thorpe :—We demand judgment, since title is found for the plaintiff, and an ouster; and the record which is sued out at their own suit in aid of the verdict proves that this can not be in respect of one and the same tenement; for if the tenant in his own person had alleged this record in bar of the assise it would not have barred the assise; for a judgment in respect of land in one vill is no bar in respect of land in another vill. — Parning. If you will admit that it is one and the same tenement, then you are barred by the record; if you say that the record is of another tenement, then the verdict serves us without anything more.—Stonore. I say that judgment will not be given before information is had whether there was such a record; and if no such record is found as they have mentioned in their verdict, no regard will be had to their verdict on that point. And now you have