Original Documents: Edward I Parliaments, Roll 8

Parliament Rolls of Medieval England. Originally published by Boydell, Woodbridge, 2005.

This premium content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.

'Original Documents: Edward I Parliaments, Roll 8', in Parliament Rolls of Medieval England, (Woodbridge, 2005) pp. . British History Online https://www.british-history.ac.uk/no-series/parliament-rolls-medieval/roll-8 [accessed 24 March 2024]

In this section

Roll 8

Roll 8 (SC 9/8)

Roll 8 consists of two membranes only. Membrane 1 is 635x210-213 mm; membrane 2 is 685x210-215 mm. Both are written in a similar official hand. There has been some damage to the bottom of both membranes and they have been repaired. The nineteenth century cover is sewn to the bottom of m. 2. The membranes are sewn together at the top with backstitching. Neither membrane is numbered.

There is writing on the face and the dorse of both membranes. The language of the roll is Latin throughout. The heading of membrane 1 describes its contents as consisting of pleas before the king and his council at Westminster after Michaelmas in the twenty-first year of the reign of king Edward and all the enrolments on both membranes do indeed seem to belong to the Michaelmas parliament of 1293.

These two membranes contain the first stage of proceedings on complaints against William de Vescy as justiciar of Ireland (fn. roll08-foot-1) or as lord of the liberty of Kildare. Complaints of the latter kind either mention him alone, (fn. roll08-foot-2) or also include others in the complaint: Thomas Maunsel, the sheriff of Kildare, (fn. roll08-foot-3) or Thomas Darcy, the steward of Kildare. (fn. roll08-foot-4) There is also one complaint against de Vescy in both capacities, (fn. roll08-foot-5) and one information lodged by him in the form of a complaint against John fitzThomas. (fn. roll08-foot-6) The marginal headings describe all these complaints and informations as 'petitions'. A special commission was established on 10 December 1293 to investigate the complaints against de Vescy and to report back on them in time for the Easter parliament of 1294. (fn. roll08-foot-7) There also survives a roll of the inquisitions held by these commissioners in Ireland into some of these complaints. (fn. roll08-foot-8)

Roll 8 was not used for the Vetus Codex; nor was it printed in RP. It was first printed in extenso by Richardson and Sayles in Rotuli Parliamentorum Hactenus Inediti , at pp. 30-45.

Text and translation

[p. ix-30]
[memb. 1]
PLACITA CORAM DOMINO REGE ET EJUS CONSILIO AD PARLIAMENTUM SUUM APUD WESTM' POST FESTUM SANCTI MICHAELIS ANNO REGNI REGIS EDWARDI VICESIMO PRIMO. PLEAS BEFORE THE LORD KING AND HIS COUNCIL AT HIS PARLIAMENT AT WESTMINSTER AFTER THE FEAST OF MICHAELMAS IN THE TWENTY-FIRST YEAR OF THE REIGN OF KING EDWARD.
1 (1). Peticio Walrani Wodeloke et Philippi Benet. [Proceedings on the complaint of Waleran Wodeloke and Philip Benet against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare relating to the wrongful release of Hugh de Stertleye from prison, the seizure of their goods and their amercement.]
Iidem Walranus et Philippus ostendunt domino regi quod, cum ipsi implacitaverunt coram archiepiscopo Dublinensi, justiciario Hibernie, quemdam Hugonem de Sterteleye de eo quod acquietaret eos de quindecim grossis saccis lane versus Lumbardos, de quibus versus eos ipsum plegiaverunt, idem Hugo ad acquietacionem etc. adjudicatus fuit et corpus suum prisone committebatur, ita quod per judicium illud bona predicti Hugonis ad valenciam .xlij. librarum eisdem plegiis adjudicata fuerunt in propartem solucionis predicti debiti etc., [p. ix-31] Willelmus de Vescy predictum Hugonem a prisona deliberavit absque judicio et bona ipsorum plegiorum per Thomam Maunsel vicecomitem de Kyldare capere et seisire fecit, et nichilominus ipsum Walranum ad .iiij. or libras et ipsum Philippum ad .xl. solidos in curia sua de Kyldare amerciavit, eo quod non placitaverunt in curia sua predicta, ob quod neccessario [sic: read 'necessario'] oportuit eos satisfacere dictis Lumbardis de .l. marcis pro porcione sua etc., pro qua solucione idem Philippus vendidit unam carucatam terre etc.: unde petunt remedium etc. 1 (1). The petition of Waleran Wodeloke and Philip Benet. The same Waleran and Philip show the lord king that, whereas they had impleaded a certain Hugh de Sterteleye before the archbishop of Dublin, the justiciar of Ireland, for him to acquit them in respect of fifteen large sacks of wool against the Lombards, for which they had stood surety for him against them, and the same Hugh was adjudged to acquit etc. and he was sent to prison, so that through that judgment the aforesaid Hugh's goods to the value of £42 were adjudged to the same sureties in part payment of the aforesaid debt etc., [p. ix-31] William de Vescy has released the aforesaid Hugh from prison without a judgment, and had the goods of the same sureties taken and seized by Thomas Maunsel, sheriff of Kildare, and nevertheless amerced the same Waleran at £4 and the same Philip at 40 shillings in his court of Kildare because they did not plead in his aforesaid court, on account of which it was necessary for them to give satisfaction for 50 marks to the said Lombards for their share etc., for which payment the same Philip sold a carucate of land etc.: for which they request a remedy etc.
Et Willelmus venit. Et quo ad deliberacionem predicti Hugonis dicit quod predictus Hugo non fuit deliberatus per eum set per predecessorem suum, archiepiscopum Dublinensem. Et predictus Walranus non sequitur. Ideo quo ad eum nichil. Set quo ad capcionem bonorum predicti Philippi, qui presens est et inde se queritur, dicit quod predictus Philippus indictatus fuit in curia sua de Kyldare de roberia et aliis transgressionibus contra pacem etc., et predictus Philippus ibi vocatus non venit, set se subtraxit et fugit, pro qua fuga seisire fecit in manum suam omnia catalla predicti Philippi, et dicit quod postea idem Philippus pro contumacia sua utlagatus fuit in eadem curia sua; et de hoc vocat recordum curie predicte etc. And William appears. With regard to the release of the aforesaid Hugh he says that the aforesaid Hugh was not released by him but by his predecessor, the archbishop of Dublin. And the aforesaid Waleran does not sue. Therefore nothing is to be done with regard to him. But with regard to the seizure of the goods of the aforesaid Philip, who is present and who makes complaint about this, he says that the aforesaid Philip was indicted in his court of Kildare of robbery and other trespasses against the peace etc., and the aforesaid Philip was called there and did not appear but withdrew and fled, for which flight he had all the chattels of the aforesaid Philip seized into his hand, and he says that the same Philip was afterwards outlawed in his same court for his contumacy; and on this matter he vouches the record of the aforesaid court etc.
Et Philippus dicit quod, tempore quo dictus Willelmus dicit ipsum utlagatum fuisse, fuit ipse Philippus in Anglia ad impetrandum super injuriis predictis, et dicit quod tempore quo predictus Willelmus seysire fecit in manum suam catalla predicti Philippi, fuit ipse Philippus ad pacem regis et omnium aliorum nec tempore illo fuit ipse fugitivus, et hoc paratus < est > verificare etc. And Philip says that, at the time when the said William says that he was outlawed, the same Philip was in England to seek a remedy for his aforesaid wrongs, and he says that at the time when the aforesaid William had the chattels of the aforesaid Philip seized into his hand, the same Philip was in the peace of the king and of all others, nor was he a fugitive at that time, and this he is prepared to prove etc.
Et predictus Willelmus, quesitus si predictam verificacionem velit admittere, dicit quod non est neccesse [sic: read 'necesse'] , ex quo paratus est verificare per recordum quod per judicium utlagatus est. Ideo loquendum < est > cum rege etc. And the aforesaid William, asked if he wishes to accept the aforesaid proof, says that it is not necessary, as he is prepared to prove by record that he was outlawed by judgment. Therefore the matter is to be discussed with the king etc.
Postea per dominum regem et ejus consilium concorditer est provisum quod recordum curie sue proprie habere non debet, set quod inde rei veritas inquiratur per patriam etc. coram assignatis per dominum regem etc. Et quo ad deliberacionem factam de predicto Hugone, inquiratur de archiepiscopo Dublinensi si predictus Hugo deliberatus fuit tempore suo an tempore Willelmi de Vescy, et referatur ad proximum parliamentum etc. Et similiter retornetur inquisicio cum capta fuerit domino regi etc. Afterwards it is unanimously decided by the lord king and his council that he is not entitled to have the record of his own court, but that the truth of the matter is to be ascertained by jury etc. before those commissioned by the lord king etc. And with regard to the release of the aforesaid Hugh, enquiries are to be made of the archbishop of Dublin as to whether the aforesaid Hugh was released during his time or during the time of William de Vescy, and this is to be reported on at the next parliament etc. And likewise the enquiry, when it has been held, is to be returned to the lord king etc.
2 (2). Peticio abbatis Sancti Thome Dublin'. [Proceedings on the complaint of the abbot of St Thomas Dublin against Thomas Maunsel, sheriff of Kildare, relating to the seizure of a felon arrested in the abbey's cross-land while on his way for trial in Dublin and his trial and condemnation in Kildare and against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare for harassment and excessive distraints].
Idem abbas ostendit domino regi quod, cum homines ipsius abbatis ceperant quemdam [p. ix-32] filium Henrici de Kyl in terra incroceata ipsius abbatis pro morte Radulphi le Archer et ipsum deberent adducere Dublin' ad judicium etc., prout moris est < etc. > , Johannes filius Roberti et alii plures per preceptum Thome Maunsel, vicecomitis Willelmi de Vescy, ipsum felonem euntem versus Dublin' in regia strata ductum vi et armis ceperunt, et homines crocee ipsum felonem ducentes forstallaverunt, et ipsum felonem adduxerunt de crocea domini regis usque Kyldare simul cum catallis suis ad valenciam .iiij. or solidorum in eadem crocea existentibus asportaverunt, et judicium de predicto felone fecerunt in prejudicium regie dignitatis etc. 2 (2). The petition of the abbot of St Thomas Dublin. The same abbot shows the lord king that, whereas the men of the same abbot arrested a certain [p. ix-32] son of Henry of Kill in the cross-land of the same abbot for the death of Ralph Archer and were to have brought him to Dublin for judgment etc., as is the custom etc., John FitzRobert and many others, at the command of Thomas Maunsel, the sheriff of William de Vescy, seized the same felon with force and arms, in the king's highway while he was travelling towards Dublin, and assaulted the men of the cross-land conducting the same felon, and brought the same felon from the lord king's cross-land to Kildare and also carried off his chattels to the value of 4 shillings in the same cross-land, and gave judgment on the aforesaid felon to the prejudice of the royal dignity etc.
Item, idem abbas queritur se de pluribus injuriis et dampnis sibi per Willelmum de Vescy in manerio suo de Kyldare [sic: read 'Kyll'] infra libertatem de Kyldare illatis, ita < quod > propter districciones intollerabiles et vexaciones etc. non potuit terram suam arare, seminare nec inde comodum aliquod habere, ad dampnum suum etc. Et ille transgressiones facte fuerunt per Thomam Maunsel, Willelmum de Kendale, Adam Janitorem, Thomam Dary [sic: read 'Darcy'] , et Ricardum Pykering' < etc. > Item, the same abbot makes complaint about various wrongs and losses inflicted upon him by William de Vescy in his manor of Kill, within the liberty of Kildare, so that, as a result of the unbearable distraints and harassments etc. he was unable to plough his land, sow it or have any benefit from it, to his harm etc. And those trespasses were committed by Thomas Maunsel, William of Kendal, Adam Porter, Thomas Darcy and Richard Pickering etc.
Et Willelmus de Vescy super predictis articulis allocutus venit et quo ad primum articulum respondit et dicit quod revera predictus Willelmus filius Henrici suspensus fuit per judicium curie de Kyldare, quam tenet in propartem simul cum quadam Agatha de Mortuo Mari et Matillide de Kyme, sine quibus non potest rem istam deducere in judicium. Et predictus Willelmus, quesitus si clamet aliquem felonem extra libertatem predictam capere pro felonia facta infra libertatem predictam et de tali felone judicium facere, dicit quod non. Nec si predicti vicecomes et alii ipsum felonem extra libertatem suam ceperunt hoc scire non potest, set petit auxilium de participibus suis etc., et quod predicti factores veniant de facto suo responsuri. And William de Vescy who is challenged on the aforesaid articles appears. With regard to the first article he answers and says that indeed the aforesaid William FitzHenry was hanged by the judgment of the court of Kildare, which he holds in purparty together with a certain Agatha de Mortimer and Maud of Kyme, without whom he cannot bring this matter to judgment. And the aforesaid William, asked if he claims the right to arrest any felon outside the aforesaid liberty for a felony committed inside the aforesaid liberty, and to do judgment on such a felon, says that he does not. Nor can he know whether the aforesaid sheriff and others seized that felon outside his liberty, but asks for aid from his coparceners etc., and that the aforesaid perpetrators appear to answer for their action.
Ideo predicti participes summoneantur quod sint coram eis quos < dominus > rex ad querelas super dictum justiciarium audiendas et terminandas assignabit. Et similiter dictum est eidem Willelmo quod habeat predictos factores coram eisdem de facto suo simul cum predicto justiciario responsuros. The aforesaid coparceners are therefore summoned to appear before those whom the lord king will commission to hear and determine complaints brought against the said justiciar. And the same William is likewise told to produce the aforesaid perpetrators before them to answer for their action together with the aforesaid justiciar.
Et quo ad injurias [et] transgressiones illatas dicto abbati in manerio suo de Kill', dicit idem Willelmus et petit quod factores veniant de facto suo simul cum eo responsuri etc. Ideo ipsi attachientur quod sint coram eisdem assignatis de facto suo simul cum eo responsuri, maxime sicut fecit hoc fieri fecit tanquam dominus de Kyldare et non tanquam justiciarius etc. In loquela [p. ix-33] ista veniant factores responsuri et secundum quod per eorum responsionem factum fuerit, si predictus Willelmus omnino acquietetur vel non, remandetur regi etc. And with regard to the wrongs and trespasses inflicted on the same abbot in his manor of Kill, the same William says and requests that the perpetrators appear to answer for their action together with him etc. Therefore they are attached to appear before the same commissioners to answer for their action together with him, especially as what he did he had done as lord of Kildare and not as justiciar etc. The perpetrators are to appear to answer in this suit [p. ix-33] and depending on what, according to their answer, was done, the decision as to whether the aforesaid William is to be completely acquitted or not is to be referred back to the king etc.
3 (3). [Peticio] Mauricii [Barfot] . [Proceedings on the complaint of Maurice Barfot against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare and justiciar of Ireland for levying a fine before the time agreed for its payment].
Idem Mauricius queritur quod, cum ipse finem fecerat cum Willelmo de Vescy justiciario Hibernie et domino de Kyldare per .xv. libras pro quadam transgressione quam fecisse dicebatur in libertate de Kyldare, et de solucione predictorum denariorum habuit dies et terminos constitutos quasi per duos annos, predictus Willelmus de Vescy, ante diem solucionis predicte peccunie, omnia bona et catalla ipsius Mauricii pro predictis denariis solvendis seisire fecit in manum suam. Ac idem Mauricius, senciens se < inde > gravatum fuisse, ipsum Willelmum cum recordo illius finis per breve de sigillo Anglie venire fecit coram consilio Hibernie ut error, si quem idem Willelmus faceret, ibi corrigeretur. Ac demum idem Willelmus coram eis concessit quod, si quid aretro fuerit de fine predicto in respectu [editorial note: One letter has been erased at the end of this word.] poneretur quousque error, si quis etc. in recordo illo inveniretur, corrigeretur coram eodem consilio, et postquam sic concesseret nichilominus omnia bona et catalla ipsius Mauricii cepit, [mercandisa] etc., et alia enormia etc, unde petit < sibi > remedium etc. 3 (3). The petition of Maurice Barfot. The same Maurice makes complaint that, whereas he had made fine with William de Vescy, the justiciar of Ireland and lord of Kildare, in £15 for a certain trespass which he was said to have committed in the liberty of Kildare, and he had days and terms assigned for the payment of the aforesaid money over two years, the aforesaid William de Vescy, before the day for the payment of the aforesaid money, had all the goods and chattels of the same Maurice seized into his own hand, for payment of the aforesaid money. And the same Maurice, considering himself to have been wronged by this, had the same William appear before the council of Ireland with the record of that fine, through a writ under the seal of England, for the error, if the same William had made any, to be corrected there. And eventually the same William conceded before them that, if anything were in arrears of the aforesaid fine, it was to be respited until the error, if any etc. was found in that record, was corrected before the same council, and after he had granted this in this way, he had nevertheless seized all the goods and chattels of the same Maurice, merchandise etc., and other outrages etc., for which he requests a remedy for himself etc.
[editorial note: Responsio.] [editorial note: Answer.]
Querens fatetur quod placitum ibi pendet adhuc inter eos, et quod ad aliud parliamentum responsum fuit ei etc. < quod sequeretur breve regis predicto consilio quod in placito illo plenam et celerem justiciam faceret, ideo ad presens habeat consimile breve etc. > . The plaintiff confesses that a plea is pending there between them, and that in another parliament he was given the response etc. that he was to sue a writ of the king to the aforesaid council that they should do full and swift justice in that plea, and so for the resent he is to have a like writ etc.
Et quo ad hoc quod ipse Mauricius dicit quod idem Willelmus concessit coram consilio regis in Hibernia quod execucioni predicte pecunie cessaret quousque convinceretur etc., hoc bene defendit idem Willelmus et de hoc vocat recordum predicti consilii Hibernie etc. Et Mauricius similiter. And with regard to what the same Maurice says about the same William granting before the king's council in Ireland that he would cease from execution of the aforesaid money until it was found etc., the same William completely denies this and on this matter he vouches the record of the aforesaid council of Ireland etc. And Maurice does likewise.
Ideo mandatum est cancellario, thesaurario et consilio Hibernie quod, si predictus Willelmus talem concessionem fecit coram eis, tunc idem Willelmus respondebit coram eis quos rex assignabit etc. de contemptu regis inde facto etc. Procedatur in ista querela prout in recordo isto invenitur et remandetur hoc quod factum fuerit regi etc. The chancellor, treasurer and council of Ireland are therefore ordered that, if the aforesaid William made such a concession before them, then the same William is to answer before those whom the king will commission etc. for the contempt committed against the king on the matter etc. Proceedings are to take place in this suit as is found in this record, and what is done is to be returned to the king etc.
4 (4). Peticio Johannis [filii] Thome. [Proceedings on the complaint of John FitzThomas against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare for refusal to allow a royal protection in the liberty court].
Idem Johannes queritur de Willelmo de Vescy quod non allocavit protectionem domini regis cum clausula in curia sua de Kyldare in quodam placito inter [p. ix-34] quamdam dominam per breve de consanguinitate < petentem et predictum > Johannem tenentem, cum protectio illa porrecta fuit ante judicium, eo quod predictus Willelmus [...] per quemdam Johannem de Malton' in presencia ipsius Willelmi tunc dixit quod protectio regis non tenuit locum in libertate de Kyldare etc. 4 (4). The petition of John FitzThomas. The same John makes complaint against William de Vescy that he did not allow the protection of the lord king with clause in his court of Kildare in a certain plea between [p. ix-34] a certain lady, demandant, through a writ of cosinage, and the aforesaid John, tenant, although that protection was produced before judgment, because the aforesaid William, through a certain John de Malton in the presence of the same William then said that the king's protection had no place within the liberty of Kildare etc.
Et Willelmus venit et < dicit > quod revera protectio illa porrecta fuit et allocata in curia de Kyldare et de hoc vocat recordum curie de Kyldare. Et Johannes dicit quod recordum curie sue < predicte > habere non debet in hac parte, set < dicit quod > protectio illa non fuit allocata et < hoc > paratus est verificare per patriam. Et Willelmus dicit quod, si curia regis considerat quod ad recordum predictum attingere non potest quod protectio illa allocata fuit, paratus est verificare sicut curia etc. And William appears. He says that this protection was indeed produced and allowed in the court of Kildare, and on this he vouches the record of the court of Kildare. And John says that he is not entitled to have the record of his aforesaid court on this matter, but he says that that protection was not allowed and this he is prepared to prove by a jury. And William says that, if the king's court adjudges that he cannot make use of the aforesaid record, he is prepared to prove that this protection was allowed as the court etc.
Postea coram domino rege et ejus consilio concorditer est provisum quod recordum curie sue predicte ei valere non debet < in hoc > , set quod rei veritas inquiratur per patriam etc. Afterwards it is unanimously decided before the lord king and his council that the record of his aforesaid court ought not to avail him in this, but that the truth of the matter is to be ascertained by a jury etc.
Inquiratur et retornetur < coram rege > cum inquisicione etc. It is to be ascertained and returned before the king with the enquiry etc.
5. Preterea, cum nulli ministri regis debeant aliquas partes manutenere nec ad partem capere, idem Willelmus per collusionem et prelocucionem inter ipsum et Agnetem de Valence manutenuit quamdam Egideam de Cogan contra eundem Johannem, et ei promisit quod eam faceret perquirere totam terram predicti Johannis et pro placito illo teneri fecit assisas suas de libertate de Kyldare durante itinere domini regis in comitatu predicto, scilicet Dublin', in exheredacionem domini regis et contra statutum et ad dampnum predicti Johannis etc. [Proceedings on the complaint of John FitzThomas against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare, alleging maintenance of Gill de Cogan by agreement with Agnes de Valence].
5. Furthermore, whereas no ministers of the king ought to maintain any parties or agree to support pleas at champerty, the same William, by collusion and agreement between himself and Agnes de Valence, maintained a certain Gill de Cogan against the same John, and promised her that he would ensure she acquired all the aforesaid John's land, and for that plea he had his assizes of the liberty of Kildare held during the lord king's eyre in the aforesaid county, that is Dublin, to the disinheritance of the lord king and contrary to the statute and to the harm of the aforesaid John etc.
Et Willelmus venit et quo ad manutenementum etc. dicit quod revera quedam prelocucio et convencio facta fuit inter predictum Willelmum et predictam Egideam de reversione terre Geysil eidem Willelmo concedenda pro .xl. libris quas ei solveret tali condicione quod, si predicta Egidea ipsum securum faceret de predicta terra, quod retineret predictas .xl. libras; sin autem quod rehaberet predictam peccuniam, et dicit quod nullo alio modo manutenuit placitum predictum etc. And William appears, and with regard to the maintenance etc. he says that a certain arrangement and agreement was indeed made between the aforesaid William and the aforesaid Gill concerning the reversion of the land of Geashill which was to be granted to the same William for £40 which he was to pay her but on this condition that, if the aforesaid Gill provided surety that he would get the aforesaid land, she was to keep the aforesaid £40, but, if not, he was to have the aforesaid money back; and he says that in no other way did he maintain the aforesaid plea etc.
Et Johannes dicit quod predictus Willelmus predictum placitum manutenuit per prelocucionem inde inter eos habitam, et hoc bene patet eo quod predictus Johannes implacitatus fuit de terra sua in predicta curia de Kyldare in termino sancti Michaelis anno regis nunc .xix. o , quo tempore iter domini regis Dublin' tentum fuit, et hoc offert verificare pro domino rege per recordum justiciariorum itinerancium in comitatu predicto et per rotulos itineris predicti etc. And John says that the aforesaid William maintained the aforesaid plea under an agreement made between them on the matter, and this is quite clear because the aforesaid John was impleaded for his land in the aforesaid court of Kildare in Michaelmas term in the nineteenth year of the reign of the present king, at which time the lord king's eyre was held in Dublin, and he offers to prove this on the lord king's behalf by the record of the justices in eyre in the aforesaid county, and through the rolls of the aforesaid eyre etc.
Postea [p. ix-35] coram domino rege et ejus consilio est provisum quod [sic: read 'quo ad'] manutenenciam factam versus predictum Johannem quod rex non vult aliquid inde inquiri per patriam, eo quod idem Johannes nichil amisit etc. Afterwards [p. ix-35] it is decided before the lord king and his council on the matter of the maintenance perpetrated against the aforesaid John that the king does not want any enquiry by jury on the matter, since the same John has not lost anything etc.
Et quo ad assisas tentas apud Kyldare per preceptum predicti justiciarii durante itinere et sedentibus justiciariis itinerantibus apud Dublin', inquiratur rei veritas per recordum rotulorum predictorum justiciariorum itinerancium etc., et remandetur regi recordum eorundem justiciariorum etc. And on the matter of the assizes held at Kildare at the command of the aforesaid justiciar during the eyre, and while the justices in eyre were in session at Dublin, the truth is to be ascertained from the record of the rolls of the aforesaid justices in Eyre etc., and the record of the same justices is to be returned to the king etc.
[memb. 1, dorse]
6 (5). Peticio Thome filii Mauricii. [Proceedings on the complaint of Thomas FitzMaurice against William de Vescy as justiciar of Ireland, alleging the wrongful release by him of an Irish hostage and the constraint of Thomas to accept an unfavourable peace with Donal Roth].
Idem Thomas ostendit domino regi quod, cum inter ipsum et Dovenaldum Roth' tenentem suum fuisset guerra mota, et postea Johannes O Donekuth', nepos predicti Dovenaldi, per eum tanquam obses fuisset captus, per cujus capcionem predictus Dovenaldus et sui, de parte sua dubitantes, de pace tractaverunt cum eo, ita quod pax inter eos < fuit > formata pro quadam certa summa peccunie et pro deliberacione predicti Johannis, cujus locum [sic] frater suus tanquam obses fuit eidem Thome liberatus, qui quidem Thomas ipsum obsidem in castro suo de Dungervan posuit custodiendum, et Willelmus de Vescy auctoritate sua propria ipsum obsidem a prisona illa, absque assensu et voluntate, deliberavit per prelocucionem inter ipsum Willelmum et predictum Dovenaldum Roth' habitam, et post deliberacionem ejus ipse Dovenaldus et sui terras predicti Thome dummodo fuit in Anglia depredaverunt, et per homicidia et incendia eas vastaverunt, et postea idem Thomas in Hiberniam regressus Hibernicos illos in insulam cum suis averiis depulsit. Ac idem Willelmus ad peticionem ejusdem Dovenaldi ad partes de Cork' accessit, volens pacem inter predictos Thomam et Dovenaldum reformare, qui quidem Thomas pacem aliquam, ipsis Hibernicis sub pede latitantibus, nisi pax illa honestior pro rege et pro se ipso fuerat, noluit admittere. Idem Willelmus, volens aduvare [sic: read 'adjuvare'] et promovere partem predicti Dovenaldi, dixit quod, nisi predictus Thomas paci quam reformaret voluisset assentire, ipsis Hibernicis pacem regis concederet etc., propter quod oportuit predictum Thomam pacem minus honestam de predicto Dovenaldo recipere etc.; et predictus Willelmus predictum Dovenaldum et suos paci regis pro centum marcis recepit, quod quidem factum fuit in dedecus regis et dampnum ipsius Thome decem mille librarum etc. 6 (5). The petition of Thomas FitzMaurice. The same Thomas shows the lord king that, whereas a war had arisen between him and Donal Roth, his tenant, and afterwards John O'Donnchadha, the nephew of the aforesaid Donal, had been captured by him as a hostage, through whose capture the aforesaid Donal and his men, doubtful of their success, had discussed peace with him, so that peace was established between them for a certain sum of money and for the release of the aforesaid John, in place of whom his brother was handed over to the same Thomas as a hostage, which Thomas placed the same hostage in his castle of Dungarvan to be guarded, and William de Vescy on his own authority, released the same hostage from that prison, without his consent and against his wishes, under an agreement made between the same William and the aforesaid Donal Roth, and after his release the same Donal and his men plundered the lands of the aforesaid Thomas while he was in England, and through homicide and arson laid them waste, and afterwards when the same Thomas returned to Ireland, he drove those Irishmen onto an island with their animals. And the same William at the request of the same Donal travelled to the Cork area, wishing to restore peace between the aforesaid Thomas and Donal, but Thomas, with the same Irishmen lurking under his feet, refused to accept any peace unless that peace was more honourable for the king and for himself. The same William, wishing to help and to promote the side of the aforesaid Donal, said that, unless the aforesaid Thomas agreed to consent to the peace which he was making, he would grant the king's peace to the same Irishmen etc., on account of which the aforesaid Thomas had to accept a less honourable peace from the aforesaid Donal etc.; and the aforesaid William received the aforesaid Donal and his men into the king's peace for 100 marks, which was done to the king's shame and the harm of the same Thomas of £10,000 etc.
Et predictus < Thomas > vocatus non venit. Ideo quo ad eum predictus Willelmus quietus etc., set quo [p. ix-36] ad dominum regem respondit idem Willelmus et dicit quod revera idem Johannes nepos ejusdem Dovenaldi incarceratus fuit in castro de Dungarvan set non tanquam obses, immo tanquam vadium pro quodam certo numero vaccarum quem solvit usque ad sexaginta vaccas. Et quia dubitavit quod predictus Dovenaldus vellet ire contra regem ad gwerram, ipse Willelmus, de assensu et voluntate cujusdam Willelmi Barry, plenam potestatem ejusdem Thome habentis dum idem Thomas fuit in Anglia, cui Willelmo Barry nomine predicti Thome amici predicti inprisonati securitatem fecerunt de arreragiis predictarum vaccarum, predictum inprisonatum deliberavit, et, nisi eum sic deliberasset, predictus Dovenaldus et alii Hibernici voluissent ivisse ad gwerram; ita quod quicquid ibi fecit fuit ad comodum domini regis et tocius populi et ad conservacionem pacis etc. Et hoc dicit in fide qua domino regi tenetur etc. Et, si dominus rex super hoc certiorari voluerit, se certificabit modo et forma quibus sibi placuerit etc. And the aforesaid Thomas, although called, does not come. Therefore with regard to him the aforesaid William is to go quit etc., but with regard [p. ix-36] to the lord king the same William answers and says that the same John, the nephew of the same Donal, was indeed imprisoned in the castle of Dungarvan but not as a hostage, rather as the security for a certain number of cows which he paid, to a total of sixty cows. And because he feared that the aforesaid Donal would go to war against the king, the same William, with the consent and agreement of a certain William Barry, the fully empowered representative of the same Thomas while the same Thomas was in England, to which William Barry in the name of the aforesaid Thomas the relatives of the aforesaid prisoner gave security for the arrears of the aforesaid cows, released the aforesaid prisoner, and if he had not released him the aforesaid Donal and other Irishmen were intending to go to war: so that whatever he did there was to the benefit of the lord king and of all the people and for the preservation of the peace etc. And he says this on the fealty which he owes to the lord king etc. And if the lord king wishes to be informed about this, he will inform him in whatever way and form please him etc.
Postea coram domino rege et ejus consilio concorditer est ordinatum quod pro statu domini regis de omnibus premissis rei veritas per patriam < inquiratur > etc. Ideo inquiratur et remandetur regi. Afterwards it is unanimously decreed before the lord king and his council that in the interests of the lord king the truth of all the above is to be ascertained by jury etc. It is therefore to be ascertained and returned to the king.
7 (6). Peticio hominum de Kylgagan et Jacobeston'. [Proceedings on the complaint of the men of Kiltaghan and Jacobstown against Thomas Maunsel, sheriff of Kildare, and William de Vescy, as lord of the liberty of Kildare, relating to an armed raid on their lands to seize animals, which also resulted in the deaths of an Englishman and two Irishmen].
Iidem homines domini regis de villis predictis queruntur quod Thomas Maunsel, vicecomes de Kyldare, et alii cum secta sua et secta domini Willelmi de Vescy et cum vexillis dicti Willelmi displicatis intraverunt tenementum regis et illud depredaverunt de .vij. xx vaccis et .iiij. xx affris, et alia bona sua ibidem inventa ad valenciam centum marcarum ibidem ceperunt et abduxerunt etc., et quemdam Anglicum et duos Hibernicos ibidem interfecerunt, et averia et bona predicta secum apud Kyldare adduxerunt, unde adhuc sunt in seysina ad dampnum et prejudicium domini regis et hominum suorum predictorum etc. 7 (6). The petition of the men of Kiltaghan and Jacobstown. The same men of the lord king from the aforesaid townships make complaint that Thomas Maunsel, the sheriff of Kildare, and others with their retinue and the retinue of lord William de Vescy and with the banners of the said William unfurled entered the king's tenement and plundered it of 140 cows and 80 draught animals, and seized there other goods of theirs found there to the value of 100 marks and carried them off etc., and killed a certain Englishman and two Irishmen there, and took the aforesaid animals and goods with them to Kildare, of which they are still in seisin, to the harm and prejudice of the lord king and of his aforesaid men etc.
Ista peticio liberata per Johannem Herre, qui se dicit ballivum regis, qui sequitur pro eis, ut dicit, set non est eorum attornatus etc. This petition was delivered by John Herre, who says that he is the king's bailiff, who sues on their behalf, as he says, but who is not their attorney etc.
Et Willelmus de Vescy dicit quod predicte ville non sunt domini regis set cujusdam Johannis de la Roche. Et quia predicta querela tangit dominum regem, si sint homines domini regis, ideo dictum est predicto Willelmo quod predictum Thomam ministrum suum etc. sub pena qua decet habeat coram eis quos dominus rex assignabit etc. Ideo veniat dictus Thomas coram justiciariis assignatis et respondeat. [editorial note: Altered from 'respondeant'.] Et inquiratur veritas si neccesse [sic: read 'necesse'] fuerit et remandetur regi etc. And William de Vescy says that the aforesaid townships do not belong to the lord king but to a certain John de la Roche. And because the aforesaid complaint concerns the lord king, if they are the lord king's men, therefore the aforesaid William is told to produce the aforesaid Thomas his official etc. on pain of the appropriate penalty before those whom the lord king will appoint etc. The said Thomas is therefore to appear before the justices commissioned and answer. And if it necessary the truth is to be ascertained and returned to the king etc.
[p. ix-37]
8 (7). Peticio burgensium domini regis de Tristeldermot. [Proceedings on the complaint of the burgesses of Castledermot against Thomas Maunsel, sheriff of Kildare, for entering their town to hold his tourn and for various other wrongs with the response of William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare].
Iidem burgenses ostendunt domino regi quod, < cum ipsi et > eorum antecessores liberi esse solebant, ita quod nullus ballivus de Kyldare in villa sua predicta [ad aliquod] exercendum intrare solebat, Thomas Maunsel vicecomes de Kyldare et [sic] tenet de eis turnum suum ter per annum. Preterea, ubi [quarterium frumenti valet] .xl. d., capit invitis vendentibus pro .ij. s. .vj. d. Preterea capit equos eorum ad cariagia facienda, et alia plura que facta sunt, ut dicunt, per dictum Thomam vicecomitem in dicta peticione inseruntur etc. 8 (7). The petition of the lord king's burgesses of Castledermot. The same burgesses show the lord king that, whereas they and their ancestors used to be so free that no bailiff of Kildare used to enter their aforesaid town to exercise any authority, Thomas Maunsel, the sheriff of Kildare, holds his tourn there three times a year. Furthermore, whereas a quarter of wheat is worth 40d., he takes it from those unwilling to sell it for 2s. 6d. Furthermore he commandeers their horses to transport things. Many other things which are allegedly done by the said Thomas the sheriff are included in the said petition etc.
Et Willelmus de Vescy venit, et quo ad turnum dicit quod clamat habere turnum vicecomitis adeo in Tristeldermot sicut in aliis villis infra libertatem de Kyldare, et dicit quod tenet turnum illum in propartem simul cum Agatha de Mortuo Mari et Matillide de Kyme, sine quibus etc. And William de Vescy appears. With regard to the tourn he says that he claims to have a sheriff's tourn in Castledermot just as in the other townships within his liberty of Kildare, and he says that he holds that tourn in purparty together with Agatha de Mortimer and Maud of Kyme, without whom etc.
Et quo ad alias [injurias per] predictum vicecomitem eisdem burgensibus factas, dictum est predicto Willelmo quod habeat predictum vicecomitem suum coram eis quos rex assignabit etc. Ideo veniat vicecomes coram auditoribus et respondeat. Et similiter veniant participes et respondeant simul cum predicto Willelmo, si voluerint, in forma debita. Et inquiratur veritas si neccesse fuerit et reportetur regi etc. And with regard to the other wrongs inflicted by the aforesaid sheriff on the same burgesses, the aforesaid William is told to produce his aforesaid sheriff before those whom the king will commission etc. The sheriff is therefore to appear before the auditors and answer. And likewise the coparceners are to come and answer together with the aforesaid William if they wish, in the due form. And if it is necessary the truth is to be ascertained and returned to the king etc.
9 (8). Peticio Rogeri de Galeweye. [Proceedings on the complaint of Roger of Galway against Thomas Maunsel, sheriff of Kildare, alleging refusal to execute a writ of execution].
Idem Rogerus dicit quod, ubi ipse detulerit Thome Maunsel < vicecomiti de Kyldare breve domini regis de levando .xxv. marcas de terris > et catallis Isabelle de Penbrock' quas versus eam per judicium [curie] regis recuperavit, predictus vicecomes pro brevi illo nichil inde facere curavit set omnino inde supersedit etc. 9 (8). The petition of Roger of Galway. The same Roger says that, whereas he had delivered to Thomas Maunsel the sheriff of Kildare, a writ of the lord king, to levy 25 marks from the lands and chattels of Isabella of Pembroke, which he had recovered against her by a judgment of the king's court, the aforesaid sheriff did not trouble to do anything about that writ, but completely failed to act on it etc.
Ad istam peticionem dictum est predicto Willelmo quod < habeat > predictum vicecomitem coram eis quos dominus rex assignabit, eo quod in parte tanget dominum regem etc. Et ibi respondeant. Et secundum quod placitaverint procedatur. Et si neccesse [sic: read 'necesse'] fuerit inquiratur veritas per patriam etc. et remandetur regi etc. On the matter of this petition the aforesaid William is told to produce the aforesaid sheriff before those whom the lord king will commission, because in part it concerns the lord king etc. And they are to answer there. And proceedings are to take place according to what they plead. And, if it is necessary, the truth is to be ascertained by a jury etc. and returned to the king etc.
10 (9). Peticio Edmundi filii [editorial note: There is no gap but a name is clearly missing here.] de Mortuo Mari. [Proceedings on the complaint of Edmund de Mortimer against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare for penalising those who had assisted a pardoned felon who had been admitted to the king's peace].
Preterea, cum quidam Neel felo fuisset ad [pacem] regis admissus et pax ejus fuerit proclamata in terra predicti Edmundi et alibi in terra Hibernie, Willelmus de Vescy, asserens ipsum Neel pacem suam < non > habere, licet pacem regis haberet, omnes illos qui ei quid vendiderunt post pacem proclamatam vel eum receptaverunt venire fecit coram [eo] ad [p. ix-38] respondendum de receptamento, et omnes illos sic arestavit et inprisonavit quousque finem fecerunt secum per .xl. marcas. Postea coram [domino] rege et ejus consilio concorditer ordinatum est quod pax regis concessa locum tenere debet tam infra libertatem quam extra < secundum formam etc. [sic] > etc., set Willelmus de Vescy dicit quod pro feloniis factis infra libertatem de Kyldare, et quarum cognicio ad ipsum et participes suos pertinet racione libertatis predicte, et non pro aliquo facto de quo predictus Neel habuit pacem regis ipsos amerciavit, et pro amerciamento illo distrinxit, sicut ei et participibus suis bene licuit. Et petit auxilium de participibus suis etc. 10 (9). The petition of Edmund Fitz... de Mortimer. Furthermore, whereas a certain Niall, a felon, had been admitted to the king's peace and his peace had been proclaimed in the land of the aforesaid Edmund and elsewhere in the land of Ireland, William de Vescy, claiming that the same Niall did not have his peace, although he had the king's peace, had all those who sold him anything or harboured him after the peace had been proclaimed appear before him to [p. ix-38] answer for harbouring, and in this way he arrested and imprisoned all those people until they had made fine with him in 40 marks. Afterwards it is unanimously decided before the lord king and his council that when the peace of the king has been granted it ought to obtain both within a liberty and outside it, in accordance with the form etc., but William de Vescy says that he amerced them for felonies committed within the liberty of Kildare, and the cognisance of which belongs to him and his coparceners by reason of the aforesaid liberty, and not for any action for which the aforesaid Niall had the peace of the king, and he distrained for that amercement, as he and his coparceners were fully permitted to do. And he requests the aid of his coparceners etc.
Ideo veniant participes etc. coram assignatis etc. respondende simul etc. Et secundum quod responsum fuerit inquiratur veritas etc. et remandetur regi etc. The coparceners etc. are therefore to appear before those commissioned etc. to answer together with etc. And in accordance with what they answer the truth is to be ascertained etc. and is to be returned to the king etc.
[memb. 2]
11 (10). Peticio episcopi Kildarensis. [Proceedings on the complaint of the bishop of Kildare against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare, alleging that he had issued writs of prohibition in his own name].
Idem episcopus monstrat domino regi quod, cum ipse < de domino rege teneat et non de alio, Willelmus de Vescy prohibiciones suas, > nomine domini de Kyldare, predicto episcopo, suis officialibus et eorum commissariis jam hucusque dirigi fecit, in lesionem dignitatis regie etc. 11 (10). The petition of the bishop of Kildare. The same bishop shows the lord king that, whereas he holds of the lord king and not of anyone else, William de Vescy has hitherto had his prohibitions sent, in the name of the lord of Kildare, to the aforesaid bishop, to his officials and to their commissaries, to the detriment of the royal dignity etc.
Ad quam querelam predictus Willelmus respondit et dicit quod prohibiciones non clamat, set episcopus ostendit quamdam prohibicionem que exivit antequam idem Willelmus venit in Hiberniam; et hoc bene patet per datam ejusdem etc. To which complaint the aforesaid William answers and says that he does not claim prohibitions, but the bishop shows a certain prohibition which was issued before the same William came to Ireland: and this is quite clear from its date etc.
Et episcopus dicit quod predictus Willelmus post adventum suum in Hiberniam misit prohibiciones suas commissariis predicti episcopi que adhuc penes eos remanent, unde injunctum est eidem episcopo in fide qua tenetur domino regi quod si quas prohibiciones habeat que post adventum predicti Willelmi in Hiberniam exierunt, illas habeat coram eis quos rex ad querelas etc. assignabit. Et similiter pro statu domini regis inquiratur etc. et remandetur regi etc. And the bishop says that the aforesaid William, after his arrival in Ireland, sent his prohibitions to the commissaries of the aforesaid bishop, and they still remain with them, and therefore the same bishop is ordered on the fealty which he owes to the lord king that, if he has any prohibitions which were issued after the arrival of the aforesaid William in Ireland, he is to produce them before those whom the king will commission to hear complaints etc. And likewise in the interests of the lord king an enquiry etc. and returned to the king etc.
12 (11). Peticio Elye de Wynton'. [Proceedings on the information of Ellis of Winchester against Thomas Darcy, steward of Kildare, for inspecting weights and measures and punishing those who breach them without due authority with the response of William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare].
Preterea, ubi idem Elyas assignatus sit per dominum regem ad mensuras probandas et ad standardum per totam Hiberniam liberandum, Thomas Darcy, senescallus de Kildare, solus absque presencia assignati per dominum regem probacionem mensurarum facit et transgressores mensurarum, tam in terris incroceatis quam in libertate predicta, per misericordiam gravem punit etc. 12 (11). The petition of Ellis of Winchester. Furthermore, whereas the same Ellis was appointed by the lord king to inspect measures and to hand over a standard measure throughout the whole of Ireland, Thomas Darcy, the steward of Kildare, alone without the presence of the person assigned by the lord king carries out the inspection of measures and punishes trespassers against the measures, both in cross-lands and in the aforesaid liberty, with heavy amercements etc.
Et Willelmus de Vescy, super predicta [p. ix-39] probacione allocutus, dicit quod probacionem mensurarum infra libertatem predictam clamat habere, eo quod standardum capit de marescallo regis. Et dicit quod quando ivit per patriam et invenit transgressores mensurarum, illos punivit per misericordiam et denarios illos posuit in extractis ad scaccarium Dublin'. And William de Vescy, questioned on the aforesaid [p. ix-39] inspection, says that he claims to have the inspection of measures within the aforesaid liberty, because he receives the standard measure from the king's marshal. And he says that when he travelled through the country and found trespassers against the measures, he punished them through amercements and put that money in estreats to the Dublin exchequer.
Et predictus Willelmus, quesitus si marescallus regis ad hoc assignatus quando venit in libertate de Kildare mensuras ibi probare debeat, dicit quod sic. And the aforesaid William, asked whether, when the king's marshal assigned for this purpose comes to the liberty of Kildare, he ought to inspect the measures there, says yes.
Et episcopus dicit pro rege quod predictus Thomas Darcy misericordias transgressorum mensurarum, tam in terris incroceatis quam in libertate de Kildare, levavit ad opus suum proprium, scilicet de Osberto le Pestour, homine episcopi de crocea, .xl. s., et de magistro Ade de Clan, tenente de crocea, .c. s. Et hoc petit pro rege et pro ipso quod inquiratur etc. Et Willelmus similiter. And the bishop says on behalf of the king that the aforesaid Thomas Darcy levied amercements from trespassers against the measures, both in cross-lands and in the liberty of Kildare, for his own benefit: namely from Osbert Baker, the bishop's man of the cross-lands, 40s., and from master Adam de Clan, a tenant of the cross-lands, 100s. And on the king's behalf and his own he requests an enquiry into this etc. And William likewise.
Ideo inquiratur et remandetur regi etc. An enquiry is therefore to be held and returned to the king etc.
13 (12). Item contra Willelmum de Vescy. [Proceedings on the complaint of Edmund de Mortimer against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare relating to an armed raid on Edmund's land].
Preterea, cum idem Willelmus et ballivi sui simpliciter venire debent ad officium suum excercendum in terra Edmundi de Mortuo Mari, idem Willelmus et sui ballivi latenter in quindena sancti Michaelis anno .xx. et in crastino Animarum eodem anno venerint cum multitudine armatorum, ignorantibus ballivis ipsius Edmundi, et homines suos ibidem decapitaverunt et eorum animalia et bona adduxerunt et ea adhuc detinent, sub colore jurisdiccionis sue etc. 13 (12). Again against William de Vescy. Furthermore, whereas the same William and his bailiffs ought simply to come to exercise their office in the land of Edmund de Mortimer, the same William and his bailiffs came secretly at the quinzaine of Michaelmas in the twentieth year, and on the morrow of All Souls in the same year, with a multitude of armed men, without the knowledge of the bailiffs of the same Edmund, and decapitated his men there and carried off their animals and goods and still keep them, under pretext of his jurisdiction etc.
Willelmus de Vescy dicit quod predictis diebus et anno non fecit talem transgressionem sicut ei imponitur et de hoc ponit se super patriam etc. William de Vescy says that he did not commit such a trespass as he is accused of on the aforesaid days of the aforesaid year, and on this matter he puts himself on the country etc.
Inquiratur et remandetur regi. An enquiry is to be held and returned to the king.
14 (13). Peticio abbatis Sancti Thome Dublin'. [Proceedings on the complaint of the abbot of St Thomas Dublin against William de Vescy, justiciar of Ireland, and John of Malton, relating to the seizure of his house's common seal and the refusal to deliver to him the temporalities of the house in accordance with a royal mandate].
Idem abbas queritur de Willelmo de Vescy justiciario Hibernie et < de > Johanne de Malton' quod cum abbas, dum fuit electus ante creacionem suam, breve domini regis eidem Willelmo detulerit quod post confirmacionem suam, recepta fidelitate ab ipso abbate et eciam littera sua patenti quod gracia domini regis < ei > adtunc facta non traheretur in consequenciam quo ad alios abbates successores suos, eidem plenam seisinam omnium temporalium dicte domus habere faceret et liberare, ac idem abbas post consecracionem suam, assumptis secum duobus de canonicis suis qui < custodiam > communis sigilli dicte domus habuerunt, ad sigillandum litteram pro domino rege, apud Waterford' ad dictum justiciarium accedens ei breve regis super hujusmodi [editorial note: 'modi' is interlined.] liberavit, predicti Willelmus et Johannes de Malton' [p. ix-40] commune sigillum suum contra voluntatem suam de eis ceperunt et illud ipsis invitis detinuerunt a festo Annunciacionis Beate Marie anno regis nunc .xix. usque in sex septimanas sequentes, et ipsum abbatem seisinam temporalium suorum per totum tempus illud habere non fecit, in contemptum mandati domini regis et dampnum predicti abbatis .c. librarum et periculum quod posset iminere de sigilli predicti retencione etc. 14 (13). The petition of the abbot of St Thomas Dublin. The same abbot makes complaint against William de Vescy, the justiciar of Ireland, and John of Malton that, whereas the abbot, while he was still abbot-elect before his creation, delivered a writ of the lord king to the same William that, after his confirmation, once he had received the fealty of the same abbot and also his letter patent that the grace of the lord king then given to him was not to be taken as a precedent with regard to other abbots his successors, he was to let him have and deliver to him full seisin of all the temporalities of the said house, and the same abbot after his consecration, taking with him two of his canons, who had custody of the common seal of the said house, to seal the letter for the lord king, coming to the said justiciar at Waterford, delivered to him the king's writ on this matter, the aforesaid William and John of Malton [p. ix-40] took their common seal from them against their will, and kept it, without their consent, from the feast of the Annunciation of the Blessed Mary in the nineteenth year of the reign of the present king for the following six weeks, and for the whole of that time did not let the same abbot have seisin of his temporalities, in contempt of the lord king's command and to the harm of the aforesaid abbot of £100, and despite the danger which could arise from the withholding of the aforesaid seal etc.
Et Willelmus venit et dicit quod revera breve regis ei venit apud Waterford' pro dicto abbate, set quia non habuit ibi consilium regis ad predictam litteram ordinandam, ibi non fuit executus breve illud etc. Et quo ad sigillum etc., dicit quod quia duo de canonicis illius domus tulerunt illud sigillum commune apertum, et dubitavit quod per hoc forte posset iminere periculum domui predicte in prejudicium regis etc., precepit < quod > sigillum predictum fuisset clausum sub sigillo Johannis de Malton', tunc senescallo existente, et quod sigillum illud sic clausum predictis canonicis restitueretur, et sic credebat fuisse factum et nunquam inde aliquid audivit usque ad proximum parliamentum Dublin' post, ubi predictus abbas sigillum illud peciit sibi restitui et habuit. Et quod per maliciam seisinam temporalium non distulit, nisi ut consilium dicte littere < faciende > haberet paratus est verificare per patriam, si recordum suum in hoc casu locum habere non debeat. And William appears. He says that the writ of the king did indeed come to him at Waterford on behalf of the said abbot, but because he did not have the king's council there to consent to the drawing up of the aforesaid letter, he did not put that writ into execution there etc. And with regard to the seal etc., he says that because two of the canons of that house carried that common seal open, and he thought that danger might possibly come to the aforesaid house through this to the prejudice of the king etc., he commanded the aforesaid seal to be closed under the seal of John of Malton, then steward, and that the seal closed in this way be restored to the aforesaid canons, and he believed that this had been done and never heard anything more about it until the next parliament at Dublin, where the aforesaid abbot requested that seal to be restored to him, and had it. And that he did not delay the seisin of the temporalities through malice, but in order to take counsel on the issuing of the said letter he is prepared to prove by the country, if his record does not lie in this case.
Et abbas dicit quod per maliciam seisinam temporalium distulit, et quod ipso justiciario sciente sigillum illud per septem septimanas maliciose ab eis detentum fuit. Et de hoc ponit se super patriam. Et Willelmus similiter. And the abbot says that he delayed the seisin of the temporalities through malice, and that with the knowledge of the same justiciar that seal was maliciously withheld from them for seven weeks. And on this matter he puts himself on the country. And William likewise.
Ideo inquiratur rei veritas per patriam etc. et remandetur regi etc. The truth of the matter is therefore to be ascertained by a jury etc. and returned to the king etc.
15. Idem abbas insinuat domino regi quod, cum rex Johannes per cartam suam feoffaverit Willelmum le Marescall' communem antecessorem predicti Willelmi et participum suorum de terra Lagenie, salvis tamen regi et heredibus suis placitis de incendio, raptu, thesauro invento, et forestallo, et placito appelli, et salvis sibi et heredibus suis croceis et dignitatibus < sancte > ecclesie spectantibus, Willelmus de Vescy contra formam feoffamenti sui in curia sua libertatis de Kildare tenuit placitum de incendio et fecit utlagari quemdam Philippum de Staundon' pro incendio facto in libertate, et quoddam aliud [placitum] appelli inter Nicholaum Gernoun et Ricardum de Penkeston', et quoddam aliud placitum appelli inter Johannem filium Hugonis consanguineum Walteri Lenfaunt et Adam de [p. ix-41] Staundon'. Et preterea ipsum abbatem distrinxit in terris suis incroceatis, scilicet in maneriis suis de Kill', Keineth', et Chymturry [sic: read 'Cluncurry'] , deveniendo [sic: read 'de veniendo'] responsurum in curia de Kildare contra formam feoffamenti etc. [Proceedings on the information of the abbot of St Thomas Dublin against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare for exceeding his jurisdictional rights].
15. The same abbot informs the lord king that, whereas king John by his charter had enfeoffed William Marshal, the common ancestor of the aforesaid William and his coparceners, of the land of Leinster, saving however to the king and his heirs their pleas of arson, rape, treasure trove, and forestall, and appeal pleas, and saving to him and his heirs the cross-lands and privileges pertaining to holy church, William de Vescy contrary to the terms of his enfeoffment held a plea of arson in his court of the liberty of Kildare and had a certain Philip de Staundon outlawed for arson committed within the liberty, and held a certain other plea of appeal between Nicholas Gernoun and Richard of Penkeston, and a certain other plea of appeal between John FitzHugh, a kinsman of Walter Lenfaunt and Adam de [p. ix-41] Staundon, and furthermore had the same abbot distrained in his cross-lands, namely in the manors of Kill, Keineth and Cloncurry, for him to appear to answer in the court of Kildare, contrary to the terms of the feoffment etc.
Et Willelmus de Vescy venit et dicit, quo ad utlagariam predicti Philippi, quod idem Philippus utlagatus fuit tempore Agnetis matris sue. Et petit judicium etc. Et quo ad placita de appello, bene concedit quod predicta placita tenta fuerunt in eadem curia et hujusmodi placita clamat ibidem tenere, set dicit quod tenet libertatem de Kildare simul cum quadam Agatha de Mortuo Mari et Matillide de Kyme, sine quibus non potest ulterius respondere etc. Et quo ad districcionem etc., dicit quod manerium de Kennech' non est incroceatum. Et quo ad manerium de Kill' dicit quod quedam pars ejusdem non est incroceata < et > deadvocat districcionem si qua etc. And William de Vescy appears. He says, with regard to the outlawry of the aforesaid Philip, that the same Philip was outlawed in the time of Agnes his mother. And he asks for judgment etc. And with regard to the plea of appeal, he fully acknowledges that the aforesaid pleas were held in the same court and he claims to hold pleas of this kind there, but says that he holds the liberty of Kildare together with a certain Agatha de Mortimer and Maud of Kyme, without whom he cannot answer further etc. And with regard to the distraint etc., he says that the manor of Keineth is not cross-land. And with regard to the manor of Kill he says a certain part of it is not cross-land and disavows any distraint etc.
Et abbas dicit quod quicquid ipse tenet in predictis maneriis est incroceatum, eo quod rex inde habet custodiam tempore vacacionis et vicecomes regis ibi tenet turnum suum, et quod predictus Willelmus distrinxit ipsum et distringere fecit in predictis terris suis incroceatis. Et hoc paratus est verificare pro rege et pro se ipso etc. prout curia etc. Et Willelmus similiter. And the abbot says that whatever he holds in the aforesaid manors is cross-land, since the king has custody of it during vacancies and the king's sheriff holds his tourn there, and that the aforesaid William distrained him and had him distrained in his aforesaid cross-lands. And he is prepared to prove this on the king's behalf and his own etc., as the court etc. And William likewise.
Ideo inquiratur per patriam etc. et remandetur regi. It is therefore to be ascertained by jury etc. and returned to the king.
16 (14). Peticio porrecta per Willelmum de Vescy justiciarium Hibernie pro domino rege. [Proceedings on the information of William de Vescy, justiciar of Ireland, against John FitzThomas relating to his support of a rival king of Connacht to the one installed by the justiciar].
Willelmus de Vescy justiciarius Hibernie insinuat domino < suo > regi quod, cum dominus rex tradiderit Johanni filio Thome castrum suum de Roscoman custodiendum et ipse per commissionem illam homines et terram domini regis in pace < teneatur > custodire, ac predictus justiciarius post mortem cujusdam regis Hibernici parcium illarum per totum [consilium] Hibernie venit ad partes illas ad alium regem ibi faciendum, pro pace domini regis manutenenda et pro redditu de terra predicti regis Hibernici domino regi reddendo, et ipse justiciarius preceperit quod coram eo comparerent Ochonkor et Cathel Roth' in presencia episcopi loci et aliorum ligiorum domini regis, ac idem [Oconkor] ad mandatum dicti justiciarii venit coram eo, set Cathel Roth', licet salvus conductus ei oblatus fuerit, ibi per duas leucas venire non curavit, eo quod felo domini regis fuit et non ad pacem, set idem Cathel Roth' tractando de pace nuncios suos ad dictum justiciarium transmisit, set in fine recessit [editorial note: Altered from 'concessit'.] in contemptum domini regis. Et tunc demum predictus < justiciarius > fecit quemdam alium regem Hibernicum in terra illa, [p. ix-42] qui domino regi securitatem invenit de stando paci et ad redditum illum fideliter reddendum. Et post recessum predicti justiciarii a partibus illis Johannes filius [Thome] , qui per dominum regem ad pacem regis homines et terram regis ibidem custodienda fuit assignatus, in contemptum domini regis et lesionem dignitatis sue mandavit predicto Cathel Roth' feloni domini regis quod ad ipsum veniret, qui statim ad eum venit, et idem Johannes simul cum predicto Cathel Roth' super terram domini regis manu armata currere ceperunt, et terram domini regis depredaverunt de .dcc. vaccis etc., et predictum regem sic per justiciarium factum ceperunt et inprisonaverunt et .lx. homines regis ibidem occiderunt. Et post istam feloniam perpetratam idem Johannes rediit ad castrum de Roscoman et ibidem predictum Cathel Roth' felonem receptavit in lesionem dignitatis regie etc. et contemptum regis etc. 16 (14). The petition presented by William de Vescy, the justiciar of Ireland, on behalf of the lord king. William de Vescy, the justiciar of Ireland, makes it known to his lord the king that, whereas the lord king had handed over his castle of Roscommon to John FitzThomas for custody, and by that commission he is obliged to protect the lord king's men and land in peace, and the aforesaid justiciar after the death of a certain Irish king of those parts on the advice of the entire council of Ireland came to those parts to instal another king there, in order to maintain the lord king's peace and for the payment of rent for the land of the aforesaid Irish king to the lord king, and the same justiciar had ordered O'Connor and Cathal Roth to appear before him in the presence of the local bishop and of other lieges of the lord king, and the same O'Connor at the command of the said justiciar appeared before him, but Cathal Roth, although he was offered a safe-conduct, did not care to come within two leagues of the place, because he was a felon of the lord king and not at peace, but the same Cathal Roth sent his messengers to the said justiciar to discuss peace, but finally left, in contempt of the lord king. And then finally the aforesaid justiciar installed a certain other Irish king in that land, [p. ix-42] who found security for the lord king that he would keep the peace and that he would faithfully pay that rent. And after the return of the aforesaid justiciar from those parts John FitzThomas, who was appointed by the lord king to preserve the king's peace and protect the king's men and land there, in contempt of the lord king and to the detriment of his dignity, ordered the aforesaid Cathal Roth, the lord king's felon, to appear before him, who immediately came to him, and the same John together with the aforesaid Cathal Roth began to attack the lord king's land with an armed force, and plundered the lord king's land of 700 cows etc., and they captured the aforesaid king thus created by the justiciar and imprisoned him, and killed 60 of the king's men there. And after they had perpetrated this felony the same John returned to the castle of Roscommon and there he harboured the aforesaid Cathal Roth the felon, to the detriment of the royal dignity etc. and in contempt of the king etc.
Et Johannes filius Thome super articulis predictis allocutus dicit quod revera predictus justiciarius fecit regem in terra de Cunnok' predicta, et dicit quod controversia fuit inter regem illum et quemdam Cathel Roth', clamantem se esse regem ejusdem patrie, et dicit quod quodam die habito tractatu inter predictos reges de regalitate predicta, vicecomes domini regis illius patrie ibi presens, eo quod clamor astancium fuit quod predictus rex sic per justiciarium factus < quemdam equm [sic: read 'equum'] precii .x. marcarum ibi depredaverat contra pacem etc., predictum regem sic per justiciarium factum > cepisse voluit, et ipse Johannes filius Thome ibi superveniens predictum vicecomitem ad officium suum exequendum auxiliavit pro pace domini regis observanda. Et quo ad vaccas dicit quod quia dubitavit quod predictus rex de novo per justiciarium factus predictas vaccas voluit depredasse, predictas vaccas ad pacem domini regis duci fecit. Et quod predictum Cathel Roth' non receptavit, nec homines domini regis ligios occidit, nec aliquid fecit contra pacem domini regis seu in ejus contemptum, ponit se super patriam etc. And John FitzThomas, questioned on the aforesaid articles, says that he aforesaid justiciar did indeed create a king in the aforesaid land of Connacht, and he says that there was a dispute between that king and a certain Cathal Roth, who claimed to be the king of the same country, and he says that one day, when there had been a discussion between the aforesaid kings about the aforesaid kingship, the lord king's sheriff of that country, being present there, because there was an outcry by the bystanders that the aforesaid king thus created by the justiciar had stolen a certain horse worth 10 marks there, against the peace etc., had attempted to arrest the aforesaid king thus created by the justiciar, and the same John FitzThomas arriving there helped the aforesaid sheriff to perform his office, in order to preserve the peace of the lord king. And with regard to the cows he says that because he feared that the aforesaid king recently created by the justiciar wished to steal the aforesaid cows, he had the aforesaid cows taken into the peace of the lord king. And that he did not harbour the aforesaid Cathal Roth, or kill the liege men of the lord king, or do anything against the peace of the lord king or in contempt of him, he puts himself on the country etc.
Ideo rei veritas in omnibus premissis inquiratur etc. et remandetur regi. The truth of all the aforesaid is therefore to be ascertained etc. and returned to the king.
[memb. 2, dorse]
17 (15). Peticio Walteri de Ridelesford' versus Willelmum de Vescy. [editorial note: It is clear from the response to this petition that two other prior petitions by the same Walter have been omitted.] [Proceedings on the complaint of Walter of Ridelesford against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare, alleging maintenance of a land plea against him in the court of Castledermot].
Preterea idem Willelmus multum affectat terram ejusdem Walteri habere et nullo modo pro suo dando eam habere potest, et ideo [p. ix-43] jam procuravit quemdam super dictum Walterum de terra illa breve de recto perquirere et per breve de recto implacitare in curia regis de Tristeldermot infra libertatem de Kildare, que quidem curia de quindena in quindenam tenta est, et ad quamlibet curiam ibi tentam ministri libertatis illius intersunt ad procurandum et manutenendum et adjuvandum in placito predicto contra predictum Walterum, quod quidem est contra statutum etc. Et nichilominus predictus Willelmus jam de novo breve suum deliberavit et precepit quod predictus Walterus capiatur ubicumque inventus fuerit in libertate sua, per quod idem Walterus personaliter non est ausus ad curiam predictam ubi implacitatur accedere ad terram suam defendendam, eo quod curia illa est infra libertatem de Kildare unde sperat terram suam ibi perdere, nisi proteccio domini regis ei concedatur vel aliquid aliud remedium a domino rege quod ei juvare debeat in hac parte, et ita quod idem Walterus ibidem possit ire et redire ad terram suam predictam defendendam etc. 17 (15). The petition of Walter of Ridelesford against William de Vescy. Furthermore, the same William greatly desires to have the land of the same Walter and cannot acquire it in any way by payment, and therefore [p. ix-43] has already procured someone to acquire a writ of right against the said Walter for that land and to implead him by a writ of right in the king's court of Castledermot within the liberty of Kildare, which court is held every fortnight, and at each court held there the officials of that liberty are present to procure and maintain and assist in the aforesaid plea against the aforesaid Walter, which is contrary to the statute etc. And the aforesaid William has nonetheless recently delivered his writ and ordered that the aforesaid Walter be arrested, wherever he is found in his liberty, so that the same Walter does not dare to come in person to the aforesaid court where he is impleaded to defend his land, because that court is within the liberty of Kildare: and so he expects to lose his land there, unless the lord king's protection is granted to him, or some other remedy from the lord king which ought to help him in this matter, and so that the same Walter can go and return there to defend his aforesaid land etc.
Responsum est ei quo ad tres peticiones suas predictas, primo quo ad hoc quod idem Walterus dicit quod predictus Willelmus fovit Hibernicos contra dictum Walterum contra pacem etc., dicit idem Willelmus quod predictos Hibernicos non fovit nec cum eis aliquam societatem habuit nisi ut justiciarius domini regis vel tanquam dominus de Kildare ad eos ad pacem reformandum. Et petit quod dominus rex super hoc se certificet qualiter voluerit. Reply is made to him, on the matter of his aforesaid three petitions, firstly, with regard to what the same Walter says, that the aforesaid William supported the Irish against the said Walter, contrary to the peace etc., the same William says that he did not support the aforesaid Irishmen nor did he have any association with them except as the lord king's justiciar or as the lord of Kildare to bring them back into the peace. And he asks that the lord king inform himself about this as he wishes.
Postea coram domino rege et ejus consilio provisum est quod rei veritas inquiratur per patriam etc. Inquiratur et remandetur regi. Afterwards it is adjudged before the lord king and his council that the truth be ascertained by a jury etc. An enquiry is to be held and returned to the king.
18 (16). Peticio Johannis filii Thome. [Proceedings on the complaint of John FitzThomas against Thomas Maunsel sheriff of Kildare, alleging misconduct in connection with weights and measures, with the response of William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare].
Idem Johannes queritur quod Thomas Maunsel, vicecomes de Kildare, absque summonicione seu premunicione fecit probare omnes mensuras illius libertatis coram eo et omnes illos qui mensuras habuerunt graviter amerciavit, cum homines Johannis filii Thome prius tempore Agnetis de Vescy matris predicti Willelmi, cujus heres ipse est etc., de standardo Agnetis de Vescy mensuras suas ceperant, et eciam idem Thomas aliquas mensuras ibidem fecit [manere] [editorial note: Altered from 'minore'.] et minores quam standardum domini regis condonat seu vult. Nec homines libertatis illius jus in terra Hibernie, eo quod justiciarius capitalis est dominus libertatis predicte, aliquo modo consequi possunt. Et Willelmus de Vescy venit et dicit quod ipse tanquam capitalis justiciarius liberavit senescallo suo de Kildare standardum mensurarum. Et dicit quod per standardum illud mensure fuerunt probate in eadem libertate [p. ix-44] et transgressores mensurarum coram [senescallo] fuerunt puniti. Et predictus Willelmus, quesitus si clamet habere emendas mensurarum in predicta libertate, dicit quod sic. Et petit auxilium de Agatha de Mortuo Mari et Matillide de Kyme participibus suis etc. 18 (16). The petition of John FitzThomas. The same John makes complaint that Thomas Maunsel the sheriff of Kildare, without any summons or warning had all measures of that liberty inspected before him and heavily amerced all those who had measures, whereas the men of John FitzThomas previously, in the time of Agnes de Vescy, the mother of the aforesaid William, whose heir he is etc., had taken their measures from the standard of Agnes de Vescy, and that the same Thomas also had some measures kept there, and smaller than the lord king's standard allows or requires. Nor can the men of that liberty get any justice in the land of Ireland in any way, since the chief justiciar is lord of the aforesaid liberty. And William de Vescy appears. He says that as chief justiciar he delivered the standard for measures to his steward of Kildare. And he says that the measures were inspected by that standard in the same liberty [p. ix-44] and trespassers against the measures were punished before the steward. And the aforesaid William, asked if he claims to have the fines for measures in the aforesaid liberty, says that he does. And he requests aid from Agatha de Mortimer and Maud of Kyme his coparceners etc.
Ideo ipse summoneantur ad respondendum simul etc. coram auditoribus etc. Et audiantur et veritas si neccesse fuerit inquiratur et regi retornetur. They are therefore to be summoned to answer together etc. before the auditors etc. And they are to be heard, and, if it is necessary, the truth is to be ascertained and returned to the king.
19 (17). Idem Johannes filius Thome. [Proceedings on the complaint of John FitzThomas against William de Vescy as lord of the liberty of Kildare, alleging disregard of a grant of the king's peace to his Irishmen of Offaly].
Preterea, idem Johannes filius Thome queritur de Willelmo de Vescy quod, pace Hibernicorum suorum de Offaly in libertate de Kildare per breve domini regis senescallo ejusdem libertatis directum proclamata, predictus Willelmus venit in libertate de Kildare et attachiari fecit omnes illos qui eisdem Hibernicis aliquid vendiderunt vel cum eisdem societatem aliquam habuerunt ad respondendum coram eo super receptamento eorundem Hibernicorum, qui quidem venerunt et bene defenderunt quod dummodo fuerunt in gwerra ipsos non receptaverunt, set < dedicere > non potuerunt quin post pacem eorum proclamatam cum eis communicaverunt et eis vendiderunt et eos receptaverunt. Ad quod quidem responsum fuit per predictum Willelmum quod, licet pacem domini regis habuerunt, non propter hoc pacem suam habuerunt, per quod homines ipsius Johannis ibidem graviter redimebantur [editorial note: Altered from or to 'redimabantur'.] etc. in prejudicium domini regis et exheredacionem suam manifestam et dampnum tocius populi, desicut consuetudo Hibernie talis est quod, si quis feloniam fecerit in libertate et postea incendium vel aliam feloniam, cujus correccio regi pertineat, faciat, et pax domini regis postea ei fuerit concessa pax illa stabilis erit et ei valeret per totam Hiberniam, tam infra libertatem quam extra. Nec domini libertatum versus hujusmodi felonem accionem aliquam habere possunt nec hucusque potuerunt etc. 19 (17). The same John FitzThomas. Furthermore the same John FitzThomas makes complaint against William de Vescy that, when the peace of his Irishmen of Offaly in the liberty of Kildare had been proclaimed by a writ of the lord king addressed to the steward of the same liberty, the aforesaid William came to the liberty of Kildare and had all those who sold anything to the same Irishmen or had any association with them attached to answer before him for harbouring the same Irishmen, and they appeared and fully denied harbouring them while they were at war, but could not deny that they associated with them after their peace had been proclaimed and sold to them and harboured them. To which reply was made by the aforesaid William that, although they had the lord king's peace, they did not on account of this have his peace, as a result of which the men of the same John were heavily ransomed there etc. to the lord king's prejudice and to his manifest disinheritance and to the harm of the whole people, since the custom of Ireland is such that, if anyone has committed a felony within a liberty and afterwards commits arson or some other felony whose punishment belongs to the king, and the peace of the lord king is afterwards granted to him, that peace will be secure and valid for him throughout the whole of Ireland, both within liberties and outside. And the lords of liberties can have no action against such a felon, nor could they hitherto etc.
Postea coram rege et ejus consilio concorditer ordinatum est quod pax domini regis concessa valere debet, tam infra libertatem quam extra, dum tamen sub tali forma seu generaliter concedatur. Set Willelmus de Vescy dicit quod pro nullo facto quod fecerunt infra libertatem predictam seu extra in quo pax domini regis eos salvasse aut eis valuisse debuit, nec pro aliquo illorum factorum quorum cognicio ad ipsum dominum regem pertinet eos distrinxit aut in aliquo molestavit, set pro aliis feloniis factis infra libertatem de Kildare et quarum cognicio ad ipsum et participes suos pertinet, racione libertatis sue predicte, ipsos amerciavit et pro eisdem [p. ix-45] amerciamentis distrinxit, sicut ei et participibus suis bene licuit, et petit quod habeat auxilium participum suorum etc. Afterwards before the king and his council it is unanimously decided that when the peace of the lord king has been granted it ought to be valid, both within liberties and outside, provided that it is granted under such a form or generally. But William de Vescy says that he did not distrain them or harass them in any way for any deed which they did within the aforesaid liberty or outside for which the peace of the lord king ought to have protected them or availed them, nor for any of those deeds the cognisance of which belongs to the same lord king, but he amerced them for other felonies committed within the liberty of Kildare, and the cognisance of which belongs to him and his coparceners, by reason of their aforesaid liberty, and distrained them for the same [p. ix-45] amercements, as he and his coparceners were fully permitted to, and he requests that he might have the aid of his coparceners etc.
Ideo veniant participes coram auditoribus etc. Et audiantur, et veritas si neccesse fuerit inquiratur etc., et remandetur regi etc. The coparceners are therefore to appear before the auditors etc. And they are to be heard, and if it is necessary there is to be an enquiry etc., and it is to be returned to the king etc..

Appendix: Additional Information and Related Material for Roll 8

William de Vescy was justiciar of Ireland from 12 September 1290 to 18 October 1294

A special commission was established to investigate the complaints recorded on this Roll on 10 December 1293 and return the results of the enquiry for the next Easter parliament: CPR 1292-1301 , 108. A roll of inquisitions taken in Ireland also survives. This is calendared in CDI, 1293-1301 , no. 106. It reports enquiries on items 2, 14, 12, 8, 9, 7 and 11 on this Roll.