Plea Rolls for Staffordshire
32 Edward I (1)

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

Major-General Hon. George Wrottesley (editor)

Year published

1886

Pages

114-126

Citation Show another format:

'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 32 Edward I (1)', Staffordshire Historical Collections, vol. 7, part 1 (1886), pp. 114-126. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52459 Date accessed: 23 November 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Banco Roll. Hillary, 32 E. I.

(Apud Ebor, coram R. de Hengham et sociis suis, Justiciariis Regis de Banco.)

Staff. Roger son of Peter Corbizoun, sued John Giffard of Chylinton for the manor of Chylinton, of which Margaret his kinswoman, whose heir he is, was seised in demesne as of fee when she died, and he stated that the said Margaret was seised of the said manor in the time of King Henry the father of the present King, and died seised of it. From the said Margaret the fee reverted (reforciebatur) to one Peter as uncle and heir, and from the said Peter the fee descended to Roger who now sues as his son and heir.

John Giffard took exception to the count (narrationem) on the ground that Roger asserted the fee went back (asserit feodum resortiri) from the said Margaret (from whose seisin he claimed) to the said Peter as uncle and heir, and gave no reason for this, viz., that the said Margaret had died without issue; and he prayed judgment on the writ. As Roger could not deny this, he asked permission to withdraw his writ, and it was accorded. (fn. 1) m. 1.

Warr. The suit of John Giffard of Chilington versus Guy de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick, claiming that the said Guy should acquit him of the service which Walter Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield exacted from him for the freehold which he holds of the said Guy in Chilington, and in which Guy is mesne lord (medius) between them, remanet sine die, because Guy was in Scotland in the King's service, and had letters of protection till the next Feast of Easter. m. 6.

Staff. Reginald de Charnes and Juliana his wife sued William son of William de Wrottesleye for the third of a messuage and a carucate of land, twenty acres of wood, and 20s. of rent in Pylatenhale, as the dower of the said Juliana. William appeared by attorney and prayed a view, and the suit was adjourned to the Quindene of Easter.

The same Reginald and Juliana sued William de Shardycote for the third of fourteen acres of land, and they sued Stephen Fraunceys for a third of a messuage in the same vill as her dower, and the defendants did not appear. The Sheriff was ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon them for the same date. m. 32.

Staff. Richard de Northampton the Parson of the Church of Eyton, sued Thomas son of Juliana de Coulegh, William de Berkelega, John de Bromlegh, and William Bagot in a plea that they had taken and unjustly detained his cattle. The defendants did not appear, and are to be attached for the Octaves of Trinity. m. 64.

Staff. Margaret formerly wife of Henry atte Brok of Fulford, sued Robert son of Elyas de la Lowe of Fulford for a third of three roods of land in Fulford, and she sued Elyas son of Elyas de la Lowe for a third of two acres, and William son of Elyas de la Lowe for a third of two acres and a half, and John son of Elyas de la Lowe for a third of two acres and a half, and Robert Bonde for a third of three acres, and Richard del Brodeoke for a third of three acres, and William Tacke for a third of two acres and a half in the same vill, and she sued Thomas son of William de Pyckestok for a third of twelve acres in Mulewych (Millwich) Wodehuses, as her dower. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon them for three weeks from Easter. m. 78.

Staff. The Abbot of Cumbe sued William de Lude and William his son, and Adam de Ruggeley, for taking vi et armis his cattle from Trescote, and driving them to an unknown place, so that he could not replevy them according to law and custom. The defendants did not appear, and are to be attached for the Quindene of Trinity. m. 78.

Staff. William de Thomenhorn and Agnes his wife sued Thomas de Stanleye and Matilda his wife for an acre and a half of meadow in Wolseleye. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take the tenement into the King's hand, and to summon them for the Quindene of Trinity. m. 136.

Staff. John de Bromshulf and Philippa his wife sued John Pare of Fossebrok for a third of three and a half acres in Fossebrok as dower of Philippa. John did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon him for three weeks from Easter. m. 140.

Warw., Staff. Edmund son of Robert de Sumerville sued Philip de Sumervill for a sum of £2,000 (duo milia librarum) which he owed to him; and he did not appear, and the Sheriff returned he held nothing within his bailiwick; it was testified he held sufficient (quod satis habet) (fn. 2) in co. Stafford. The Sheriff of Staffordshire was therefore commanded to summon him for the Quindene of Easter. m. 148.

Staff. Richard de Sondbache and Emma formerly wife of Philip de Legh, appeared against the Abbot of Burton-upon-Trent for unjustly detaining their cattle; and they stated the Abbot had taken on the Saturday after the Feast of St. Andrew, 31 E. I., from Legh, in a place called Mulnemor, four oxen, four cows, and six steers (bovettos), and had driven them to his manor of Bromley Abbot, where he detained them.

The Abbot defended his right to them, and stated that the manor of Legh was held of the Abbot and Convent of Burton by homage and the service of 6 marks annually, and one Robert de Legh was at one time seised of it; after whose death the right to it reverted (reforciebatur) to Hawyse, Lucy, and Cecilia as his aunts and heirs, because the said Robert left no issue, and the manor was divided between them, and from Hawyse the right of her purparty descended to one Philip as son and heir, and from Philip to one Richard de Draycote as son and heir, who now holds it, and from Lucy the right of her purparty descended to one Reginald de Legh as son and heir, and from Reginald, who died s. p., to one Philip de Legh as brother and heir, and from Philip to one Reginald as son and heir, who now holds it. And from Cecilia the right of her purparty descended to the said Richard de Sandbach as son and heir, who now holds it; and he stated further that John formerly Abbot of Burton was seised of the said homage, fealty, and service by the hands of the said Robert de Legh, and he (the present Abbot) was seised of the fealty of the said Richard, Reginald, and Richard, and because 4 marks of the said 6 marks of annual rent was in arrear of the purparty of the said Reginald son of Philip, he pleaded the taking of the said cattle to be good and just.

Richard and Emma stated that they could not proceed without the other coparceners, and prayed the help of the Court (to compel their attendance), which was accorded. They are therefore to be summoned for a month from Trinity. m. 193.

Staff. Adam de Ingestre and Felicia his wife sued Adam son of Robert Cursable of Stafford for the third of a messuage in Stafford; and John son of Robert de (sic) Cursable for one-third of a messuage in the same vill as the dower of Felice. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon them for three weeks from Easter. m. 210.

Staff. Adam Coyne acknowledged he owed to Ralph de Hengham £10; one-half to be paid at the Feast of All Saints', and the other half at the Purification following; and if he should fail, that the Sheriff might raise the money on his goods and chattels. m. 223.

Staff. John de Wenlok and Alice his wife, Thomas son of William de Pykestok, and William his brother, sued John son of William de Pykestok in a plea that he should warrant to them six and a half acres of land and two of meadow in Melewyk (Millwich) near Sondon (Sandon), which Alina formerly wife of William de Sebeleye claimed as her right, and he did not appear. The Sheriff was ordered to take land belonging to him to the value of the tenements claimed into the King's hand, and to summon him for three weeks from Trinity. m. 159, dorso.

Staff. William de Stafford appeared by attorney against Richard de Culegh for taking vi et armis from Culegh, John the son and heir of John de Rewell, who was under age, and whose marriage belonged to him. Richard did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to attach him for the Quindene of Trinity, and in the meantime to find the heir and produce him at the same date. m. 150, dorso.

Staff. Juliana formerly wife of William son of Nicholas of Parva Sogenhulle sued John de Sogenhull (Sugnall) for an illegal distress. Adjourned to the Octaves of Trinity, and afterwards to the morrow of All Souls. m. 86, dorso.

Staff. Geoffrey Salveyn sued Gundreda formerly wife of Robert de Stafford for causing waste and destruction in the houses, gardens, and lands of Stotfold (Statfold), of the inheritance of Geoffrey, and which she held for a term of years. Gundreda did not appear, and is to be attached for the Octaves of Trinity. m. 65, dorso.

Coram Rege Roll. Easter, 32 E. I.

Nott. Writ of certiorari removing the suit of Alice formerly wife of Walter de Stirchesle against William de Chaddeworth and Alice de Everingham, and others, for unjustly disseising her of the manor of North Leverton, to be heard coram Rege. After detailing proceedings of 30 E. I., the record states a verdict was eventually delivered at Blye (Blidam) on the Tuesday after the Quindene of Easter, 32 E. I., which stated that Walter de Stirchesleye formerly husband of Alice and the said Alice were jointly enfeoffed of the said manor, to be held for the terms of each of their lives, but with the condition that if they should die within twenty years the said manor after their deaths should remain to their heirs for a term of ten years, and after the death of Walter, within this term, Alice married the said William de Chaddeworth, and the said William and Alice held the manor in the name of Alice until the said Alice moved a plea of divorce between her and the said William, when she demised it to one John le Wasteneys (fn. 3) to hold for her life, by virtue of which demise the said John entered into the manor, until William in his name and in the name of his wife arraigned an assize of novel disseisin against him and recovered it, and the said William shortly afterwards demised the manor to Alice formerly wife of Robert de Everingham to hold for the life of Alice formerly wife of Walter de Stirchesley, the said Alice being ignorant of the demise and not consenting to it, and the said Alice de Everingham entered by this demise and still holds the manor. And they say that all these things were done before the divorce took place between William and Alice. And after the divorce took place the said Alice de Stirchesleye had sent two of her servants to take possession of the manor, who had been beaten and insulted by Osbert a servant of Alice de Everingham and others. And the cause of the divorce was that the said William de Chaddeworth had carnally known the daughter of the said Alice de Stirchesley before he married Alice. A day was given to the parties to hear judgment at three weeks from Trinity. m. 83.

Staff. The Sheriff was ordered to raise 10 marks from the lands and chattels of Richard de Harle (Harley), lately Sheriff, and 10 marks from the lands and chattels of Walter de Besin, lately Sheriff, in part payment of damages of £40 which Walter de Strangeford had recovered against William son of William de Alrewich, Ralph de Pype, and others, and which sums the said Sheriffs had raised from the lands and chattels of the said defendants during their respective Shrievalties, and to pay them into Court at three weeks from St. Michael. m. 86.

Staff. Hugh de Alditheleye appeared against William le Teynturer of Kyderminstre, and John le Teynturer, and three others, for entering his close at Arnleye, vi et armis, and cutting down his trees, whilst he was in Scotland, and holding King's letters of protection. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to attach them, and returned they held nothing within the county; and it was testified that they held sufficient in co. Wygorn. The Sheriff of that county was therefore ordered to attach them for the Quindene of St. Michael. m. 75, dorso.

Staff. Sibilla formerly wife of John de Wyltesire, who brought a writ against Thomas son of William in le Lone of Kereswelle for the death of John her husband, did not appear to prosecute it. She is therefore to be arrested, and likewise the said Thomas, to answer for it at the suit of the King; and the Sheriff was ordered to produce them at the Quindene of Michaelmas. In the margin is written, "vacatur quia utlagatus." m. 38, dorso.

Banco Roll. Trinity, 32 E. I.

Staff. James son of Richard de Montgomery was summoned by Adam Coyne in a plea that he should warrant to him seventeen acres of land in Marchinton under Nedwode, which he holds and claims to hold of him. James appeared, and a concord was made. (fn. 4) m. 1.

Staff. In the suit of Reginald de Charnes and Juliana his wife versus William son of William de Wrottesley for dower in Pylatenhale, William appeared by attorney and called to warranty William son of Stephen de Elmedon, who is to be summoned for the Octaves of Michaelmas. m. 1.

Staff. Hugh de Hanenyate and John his son, and Alice wife of John, give a mark for license of concord with Roger Toly of Ingestre respecting tenements in Hanenyate near Tixhale. (fn. 5) m. 1.

Staff. Mabel formerly wife of Geoffrey de Gorsthulle sued William de Walton, Clerk, for a messuage in Lichefeld; and he did not appear, and the Sheriff returned he held nothing within his bailiwick; and it was testified that he held at the date of the writ, the messuage for which he was sued. He is therefore to be summoned again for the morrow of All Souls. m. 7.

Staff. Alice formerly wife of Adam son of Robert de Whythalgh sued John Rychard of Grendone for a third of twenty-four and a half acres of land in Grendon (Grindon) as her dower, John did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon him for the Octaves of Michaelmas. m. 26.

Staff. Juliana formerly wife of Robert de Halghton sued Roger le Fremon, of Oldinton, for a third of an acre of land in Offiley; and she sued William de Mees for a third of an acre, and Richard le Clerk for a third of three acres in the same vill; and she sued William le Wodeward for a third of an acre in Halghton; and Edmund, Baron of Stafford, the custos of the land and heir of Robert de Halghton, for a third of the fourth part of the manor of Mere, as her dower. The defendants did not appear, and had made default at Easter, and the dower claimed had been taken into the King's hand. Juliana is therefore to recover seisin of it. m. 32.

Staff. Roger Illary sued William son of William Felice for deforcing him of a rent of 6s. in Nether Penne, which Robert Boffery had demised to him for a term unexpired, and which rent the said Robert had afterwards sold to William. William did not appear and is to be attached for the Quindene of Michaelmas. m. 58.

Staff. The Sheriff was ordered to distrain William de Toftes, and John de Freton and Agnes his wife, and to produce them in Court to acknowledge by what service they held their tenements of Peter de Arderne in Knotton and which services the said Peter had conceded to Magister John de Burguillon by a fine levied between them, and they did not appear. The Sheriff was ordered as before to distrain, and to produce them at the Quindene of Michaelmas. m. 81.

Staff. Richard de Sondbache and Leucia his wife give a mark for license of concord with Adam de Muckleston respecting tenements in Leghe. (fn. 6) m. 130.

Staff. Alice formerly wife of Reginald de Norton sued William son of John son of Reginald de Norton, for half a mill in Norton, near Canok, as her right, and William called to warranty the Prior of Ronton, who appeared and asked it might be shown why he ought to warrant; and William produced an indenture of one Thomas Prior of Ronton, by which the said Prior and Convent conceded and quit-claimed to John son of Reginald de Norton the father of the said William, who had died, and to him, William, his eldest son, the said half of the mill of Norton, which they held by purchase from Richard de Bentleye lord of Norton, and by the confirmation of the said John, son of Reginald, rendering to the said Abbot and his successors 4s. annually; and if should happen that on any occasion they could not warrant the mill to him, they conceded that the said John and William and their heirs should be quit of the payment of the said 4s. of annual rent; and the Prior then warranted half the mill to him, and called to warranty Richard de Bentleye, who now appeared on his summons and warranted the tenements to them, and gave up the half mill to Alice, but stated that at present he could not give her the value of it, because he held no lands except of the inheritance of one Matilda his wife. It is therefore considered that the said Alice should recover seisin of half the mill against the said William, and William should have compensation from the lands of the Prior, and the Prior should be compensated from land of the said Richard when it should fall in. m. 14.

Derb. Robert de Caverswelle and Agnes his wife, Henry son of William fitz Herbert, Thomas le Toter, Thomas de Aston, William le Brunesman, junior, and William le Taillur appeared against Walter de Montegomeri, brother and heir of William de Montegomery in a plea that he should warrant to the said Robert and Agnes the third part of a messuage and sixty acres of land in Marchington, and to the said Henry the third of twenty acres in Snelleston, etc., which Alice formerly wife of William de Montegomery claimed as dower; and Walter did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take land belonging to him to the value of the dower claimed into the King's hand; and the Sheriff now returned he had done so. Robert and Agnes and the other plaintiffs are therefore to hold their lands in peace, and Alice is to be compensated from the lands of the said Walter. m. 160.

Staff. Richard son of Richard de Culsale sued Joan formerly wife of Roger de Pyulesdon (Puleston), for a messuage and three nokes of land in Boreweston (Burston) near Stanes, which Robert de Levynton gave to Richard son of Robert de Levynton and Alice his wife and heirs of their bodies, and which after the death of the said Richard and Alice should descend to the said Richard as son and heir (fn. 7) of the said Richard and Alice by the form of gift (per formam donationis). Joan stated that Richard could claim nothing in the tenements, because he had remitted and quit-claimed all his right in them, and she produced his deed. Richard acknowledged the deed, but stated he was under age at the time it was executed, viz., in 27 E. I., and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the Quindene of St. Martin. A postscript shows adjournments of the suit through defect of recognitors up to Easter following. m. 166.

Staff. John son of Reginald de Podemore gives half a mark for license of concord with Elias son of Thomas de Cherleton respecting tenements in Whytemore. m. 193, dorso.

Staff. Andrew le Mareschal and Margaret his wife give half a mark for license of concord with William de Caverswelle and Joan his wife respecting tenements in Rodelowe and Calengewode in co. Stafford, and with William le Mareschal, respecting tenements in Upton in co. Leicester. m. 159, dorso.

Staff. The executors of the will of Magister Robert de Stafford sued Magister Robert de Fyleby for 30 marks, and he did not appear; and the Bishop had been ordered to produce him in Court, and returned that Magister Robert held no ecclesiastical benefice within his See, and it was testified that the said Robert was a Prebendary of the Church of the Blessed Mary of Stafford, which was a free Chapel of the King. A mandate was therefore sent to the Dean and Chapter of the said Church, to produce the said Robert at the Quindene of Michaelmas, on which day the Dean sent no writ, etc. (a postscript shows repeated adjournments of the suit up to Trinity Term of the following year). m. 128, dorso.

Staff. Adam son of Thomas le Rede of Alstonefeld sued Roger son of Thomas de Hudelesdale and Lucy his wife for a third part of a messuage and eight acres of land in Hudelesdale (Hiddlesdale); and he sued William Engesson of Rosinton and Matilda his wife for a third of four acres in the same vill; and two parts of the said tenements were excepted because Matilda formerly wife of Robert de la Slade, and Henry son of William Keset of Beveresford, the coparceners, were summoned and would not sue for their purparties. The defendants did not appear, and had previously made default and the tenements had been taken into the King's hand. Adam is therefore to recover seisin of them. m. 125, dorso.

Staff. Thomas Organ of Levedale not appearing to prosecute his suit for an illegal distress against Agnes formerly wife of Henry de Salt, it is dismissed, and his sureties, Richard de Couleye and Robert le Flemyng, are in misericordiâ. m. 88, dorso.

Staff. John de Cotes acknowledged he owed Sir Ralph de Hengham 40s., to be repaid at the Feast of the Annunciation, etc. m. 34, dorso.

Staff. John Vicar of the Church of Cestford (Seighford) sued Richard de Dokeseye and William de Pedele for illegally seizing and detaining his horse. The defendants did not appear, and are to be attached for the morrow of All Saints. m. 23, dorso.

Salop. Isabella formerly wife of John Wynemon sued Thomas de Morf for a messuage and a quarter of a virgate of land in Alvytheleye. Thomas called to warranty Henry de Morf, who is to be summoned by the Sheriff of Staffordshire to be in Court on the morrow of All Souls. m. 21, dorso.

Pleas at Stafford before William de Mortimer and Roger de Bellafago, Justices assigned, etc., on the Feast of St. Matthew the Apostle, 32 E. I. (21st September, 1304.)

Staff. An assize, etc., if William son of Roger de Bydulf, Eva de AlboMonasterio, and William her son, had unjustly disseised Alexander de Verdun, Parson of the Church of Bydulf, of his reasonable estovers from thirty acres of wood for building new houses or for repairing old houses, and for burning and enclosing, viz., for housebote and heybote, appurtenant to his messuage in the same vill. William son of Roger stated he held nothing in the said tenements, and had done no injury to the plaintiff; and William son of Eva answered for himself and as bailiff for Eva, and as tenant, and stated that Alexander never was in seisin of the estovers claimed; and the jury found in their favour. m. 11.

Staff. An assize, etc., if William son of Stephen de Elmedon, William le Long of Wulgastone, Robert son of Adam [de] Acton, Roger de Gratelegh of Huntyndon, and Robert Cothel of Pylatonhale had unjustly disseised Reginald de Charles (Charnes) and Juliana his wife of the third part of two messuages and half a water mill in Pylatenhale and Huntyndon. Robert le Long stated he held nothing in the tenements, and Roger de Grateleye stated he held the third part of a messuage, rendering to the said Reginald and Juliana 4d. annually for it; and Robert Chothel stated he held of them the third part of a messuage, for which he paid 4d. annually to them. Robert son of Adam, as tenant of the third part of the mill, stated it was on the confines of Pylatenhale and Huntyndon, and he took exception to the writ on this account, and if given against him, he pleaded that he held the said third part by the assignment of the said Reginald and Juliana, rendering 5s. annually to the said William son of Stephen, and as they could not distrain him for the rent, he prayed judgment whether an action would lie against him. Reginald and Juliana eventually withdrew their writ. m. 11.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Edmund Baron of Stafford, Brother Simon de Tevelesford, William le Budel, and Richard de Burton, had unjustly disseised John de Haseleye the Master of St. John the Baptist near the Bridge of Stafford of a messuage and a carucate of land and 40s. of rent in the suburb of Stafford. Edmund the Baron answered as tenant, and took exception to the assize because the said John had been deposed from the mastership of the House by a judgment of the Ordinary, and one Richard had been admitted on his presentation; and Richard afterwards by the judgment of the Ordinary had been also deposed, and one Roger had been admitted on his presentation, who was now Master; and if it was held that the assize should proceed, he pleaded that the tenements were in Bradeleye and not in the suburb of Stafford.

John stated he had been admitted Master on the presentation of the said Edmund before the date of the writ, and up to this time had continued his status as Master, and he put himself on the assize. The jury say that the said John is not Master of the House, and never was, because he never held anything in the House but a certain livery (liberationem). He is therefore in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 11.

Staff. William son of William de Hondesacre not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against Roger Corbet and others respecting common of pasture in Bromleye Regis, he and his sureties, viz., William de Norton and Robert del Hulle, are in misericordiâ. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Thomas le Rus and William le Clerk had unjustly disseised William Illory of 4 marks of rent in Walshale. Thomas took exception to the writ because one Thomas le Mouner (Miller) held the tenement from which the rent proceeded, and he was not named in the writ, and if decided against him, he pleaded that the tenement was part of the ancient demesne of the Crown, and not suable at common law. The suit was afterwards adjourned on the prayer of the plaintiff till the Thursday on the Vigil of St. Vincent at Lychefeld. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. An assize, etc., if John son of Michael, John son of Henry le Hore the Clerk, William son of Robert Wauter, Robert le Clerk of Bevereleye, Walter son of Robert Walter, and William son of Richard le Bercher, had unjustly disseised Robert son of Richard le Carpenter of Pylatenhale of a messuage and an acre of land in Pylatenhale. John stated that one Walter de Elmedon had enfeoffed the said Michael and Emma his wife, and he had entered by that feoffment, and had continued his seisin after the death of Michael and Emma. Robert admitted that the said Walter had enfeoffed the said Michael and Emma, but he stated that after the death of Michael and Emma he had entered as son and heir, and was in good seisin until ejected by the said John, and he put himself on the assize. The jury say that the said Robert never was in seisin of the tenements as of a freehold. He is therefore in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. Alice formerly wife of William Tyrri not prosecuting her writ of novel disseisin against Benedict de Coudrey and William le Taillour of Leek respecting tenements in Leek, the suit is dismissed. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. Thomas son of Nicholas son of Stephen of Bromleye Bagod not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against John Bagod of Bromleye Bagod and others, respecting tenements in Bromleye Bagod, the suit is dismissed. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. Robert son of Walter de Melewych not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against Henry de Haxstal and others respecting tenements in Melewych (Milwich), the suit is dismissed, and he and his sureties, viz., William de Smalrys and Thomas le Wyte of Hucesdon, are in misericordiâ. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. Richard son of Alexander de Saverleye not prosecuting his writ against Richard son of Richard de la Lee and others respecting tenements in Saverley and Fulford, the suit is dismissed. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. An assize, etc., if John de Carmynton and Gilbert of the Tune had unjustly disseised Warine Gyffard of Caldicote of two acres of meadow and two parts of a messuage and half a virgate of land in Westbromwych. Gilbert answered as tenant, and stated he entered by John de Carmynton, and John had entered by the said Warine. The jury found that the tenements were formerly in the seisin of the said Warine, and he being resident at Coldycote in co. Warwick, had executed there a deed of feoffment to the said John for the tenements and had delivered it to him, and under cover of that deed the said John had come back from those parts and had entered into the tenements and appropriated them to himself, and had afterwards enfeoffed the said Gilbert of them. Verdict for Warine, who is to recover seisin and 15s. as damages. (fn. 8) m. 11, dorso.

Staff. Roger son of Peter Corbyzun not prosecuting his writ of mort d'ancestor versus Adam de Honyleye and others respecting twenty-four acres of land in Madele, he and his sureties, viz., William de Hampton and Robert Fynch, are in misericordiâ. m. 11, dorso.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Peter de Barton had unjustly disseised Mabel formerly wife of Geoffrey de Gorshulle of two parts of a messuage in Lychefeld. Peter stated that as regards the half of the two parts claimed, he held it conjointly with Alice his wife, who was not named in the writ; and as regards the other half, Geoffrey the husband of Mabel had enfeoffed him of it twelve years before his death, and had put him into seisin of it.

Mabel stated that a certain John de Pipe had enfeoffed her of two parts of the said messuage when she was single, and before Geoffrey had married her, and after the marriage Geoffrey had demised those two parts to the said Peter, and after the death of Geoffrey, Peter had reconveyed the two parts to her, viz., in the week of Pentecost, and had put her into seisin of them, and she was in good and peaceable seisin until the Feast of St. Bartholomew following, when Peter had unjustly disseised her, and she put herself on the assize. The jury found in her favour, and taxed her damages at 20s. m. 12.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Hugh on la Grene of Alveton and Alice his wife, John Wodegrim and Ralph de Stone, had unjustly disseised Henry de Waterfal of a messuage and an acre and three roods of land in Alveton. Hugh and Alice answered as tenants, and denied that Henry had ever been in seisin of the tenements, but the jury found in favour of Henry; damages 2s. m. 12.

Staff. An assize, etc., if William de Barneville and Robert his brother had unjustly disseised Margaret the daughter of William de la Dune of a messuage and fourth part of a virgate of land in Saldeford (Shallowford) near Chebeseye. Robert stated he only held the tenements for a term of years by a demise of William, and William stated he claimed nothing in them except as custos by reason of the minority of Lucy and Lettice the daughters of William le Lovert who died seised of them, and after whose death the said Lucy and Lettice had entered as his daughters and heirs, and they were not named in the writ. As Margaret could not deny this, she is in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 12.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Alice daughter of John son of Simon de Cherleton, Nicholas le Wodeward, and John Partrich, had unjustly disseised Elyas le Foughelere and Petronilla his wife, Alice formerly wife of John le Clerk, and Margaret, Joan, and Agnes, sisters of Alice, of their freehold in Swynnerton (tenement not described). A note states that the suit was pleaded elsewhere. m. 12.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Elyas son of Stephen de Brocholes of Bromlegh Abbatis, and Robert son of Nicholas del Hul of Bromlegh Abbatis and Dyonisia his wife, Adam son of Stephen de Brocholes, Margaret Pas, Adam Lenk, Robert son of William de Tunstall, William de Hareleg, and William Heyrot of Bromlegh Abbatis, had unjustly disseised Nicholas de Wetton, Clerk, of a messuage and forty-seven acres of land, seven acres of meadow, and four acres of moor in Bromlegh Abbatis. Robert son of Nicholas answered for all the defendants, and took exception to the writ because Blithebury was a certain hamlet of Rideware Mauveysin, and it would appear by the writ, it was a vill by itself; (fn. 9) and if this point was given against him, he pleaded he had entered into the tenements by the said Elyas, and Elyas stated he entered by one Stephen father of Elyas. The jury say that Blithebury is a vill, and that the tenements were for some time in seisin of the said Elyas, who enfeoffed in them the said Nicholas de Wetton and put him into seisin of them, and he had been in peaceable seisin of them for more than a fortnight, until the defendants, with the exception of Margaret and William de Harlegh, had unjustly disseised him. Nicholas is therefore to recover seisin; and his damages are taxed at £20. A note states that the damages included the goods and chattels found in the tenements as well as other damages. m. 12, dorso.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Thomas le Rus and Walter de Wynterton and Anabel his wife had unjustly disseised the Abbot of Oseneye of common of pasture in thirty acres of wood and pasture in Waleshale appurtenant to his freehold in Stonhale. Walter answered for all the defendants, and pleaded that he held the tenements and was enfeoffed of them conjointly with Amabella his wife, who was not named in the writ; and if this was given against him, he pleaded that the tenements for which the Abbot claimed common appurtenant is the glebe of his Church of Shenstone, of which church the Abbot was Parson, and was not named in the writ; and if this was given against him, he pleaded that the Abbot never was in seisin of the common of pasture claimed. The jury say that the wife of Walter was called Anabilla and not Amabilla as averred by Walter, and that the Abbots of Oseneye the predecessors of the present Abbot were seised of the said common of pasture for forty years and more before they were Parsons of the said Church. The Abbot is therefore to recover seisin, and his damages are taxed at half a mark. m. 13.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Hugh son of Robert, Adam de Chetwynde, John de Verdon of Aneton, Magister Henry de Bray, Henry atte Walle, Theobald de Verdun, Theobald his son, Nicholas, Bartholomew, and John, brothers of Theobald son of Theobald, and Hugh Hod, had unjustly disseised Henry son of Thomas de Shirford of his free tenement in Ethelaxton (Ellaston). Henry son of Thomas afterwards withdrew his writ. m. 13.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Philip de Chetewynde, Richard Beanmun, and John Roughheved had unjustly disseised Agnes formerly wife of Henry de Salt of three messuages, a virgate of land in Salt and Levedale, and of two parts of the fourth part of the manor of Salt. Philip answered for all, and stated he held the said tenements in custody of the inheritance of one Henry son of Henry de Salt, who was not named in the writ; and as Agnes could not deny this, the suit was dismissed. m. 13.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Richard de Assheleye, Idonea formerly wife of Matthew de Langeton, and Thomas son of Adam le Wodeward of Bloreton, had unjustly disseised Margaret the daughter of Mather of Langeton of a messuage and twenty acres of land in Langeton near Bloreton. Thomas appeared, and Richard was dead, and Thomas took exception to the writ because there was no vill in the county called Langetone, and that the tenements were in Longetone. The jury found in his favour on this ground, and the suit was dismissed. m. 13.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Richard son of Nicholas de Admundeston, Chaplain, and William son of Roger of Bromleye Bagot, had unjustly disseised Roger son of Richard de Albirleye of three acres of land and an acre of wood in Bromleye Bagot. Richard answered as tenant, and stated he had entered by one Hugh the Clerk of Bromleye. The jury found in favour of Roger son of Richard, who is to recover seisin, and his damages were taxed at 2s. m. 13.

Staff. Walter Devereys (Devereux) withdrew his suit against Agnes formerly wife of Roger de Somery and others respecting tenements in West Bromwych. m. 13.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Robert de Knyghtele, Robert his son, and Roger de Assheley had unjustly disseised Walter de Rommeshed of a messuage, three tofts, and an acre of land in Knightele. Robert son of Robert answered for all the defendants, and for himself as tenant, and stated he entered through Robert his father, and on behalf of his father he stated that the tenements were formerly in the seisin of one Juliana who held them of him; and as Juliana died leaving no heir, he had taken possession of them as his eschaet. Walter stated that the tenements were at one time in the seisin of one Robert son of Stephen, who died seised of them in demesne as of fee, and that after his death Juliana entered into them as daughter and heir; but it could not be said she died leaving no heir, because Robert son of Stephen had a sister Edith, who had issue Hamund, and Hamund had issue Adam, and Adam had issue Hugh, who is still alive, and is cousin and nearest heir to the said Juliana; and that Hugh had remitted and quit-claimed to him all his right and claim in the said tenements, and that he was in seisin of them until Robert and the other defendants had ejected him. The assize was respited till the Thursday on the Vigil of St. Vincent at Lychefeld, because the plaintiff challenged all the jurors, on the ground that Roger de Assheleye, one of the defendants, was the Bailiff of the Hundred, and had summoned the jury. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to summon a good assize for the date above-named, and that he should put on it tot et tales, (fn. 10) etc. m. 13, dorso.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Robert son of Robert de Tappeleye, Thomas Cuttyl of Uttokeshather, and Robert son of Nicholas de Sumersale had unjustly disseised Gilbert son of Nicholas de Sumersale of three acres of land and two parts of a messuage and three acres in Uttokeshather (Uttoxeter).

The same assize came, etc., if Robert son of Nicholas de Sumersale and Robert son of Robert de Tappeleye had unjustly disseised Richard son of Nicholas de Sumersale of eleven acres of land in Uttokeshather. Robert son of Nicholas answered for himself as tenant, and for all the other defendants, and stated his father Nicholas had died seised of the tenements, and he had entered after his death as his son and heir. The jury found in favour of Gilbert and Richard, who are to recover seisin; the damages of Gilbert being taxed at 2s., and those of Richard at half a mark. m. 13, dorso.

Staff. William son of Robert de Pylatenhale not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against Matilda formerly wife of Richard le Bercher, he and his sureties, viz., John de Pykestok and John son of Richard de Denston, are in misericordiâ. m. 14.

Staff. William de Timmor not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against John de Arderne, Richard de Cotes, and others, respecting tenements in Elleford, he and his sureties, viz., Roger le Stoupere and Hugh de Tymmor, are in misericordiâ. m. 14.

Staff. Richard son of Richard, son of Richard de Lee, not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against Richard de Lee and others, the suit is dismissed, and he and his sureties, viz., Richard de Creswell and John de Severleye, are in misericordiâ. m. 14.

Staff. Walter de Rommeshed not prosecuting his writ of novel disseisin against Robert de Knyghtele and others respecting tenements in Knyghtele, he and his sureties, viz., Adam de Whethales and Richard Golburne, are in misericordiâ. m. 14.

Staff. Peter de Gresleye and Joan his wife not prosecuting their writ of novel disseisin against John de Norton and others respecting tenements in Wytemore (Wetmoor) near Burton, they and their sureties, viz., John Rydel and John Grace, are in misericordiâ. m. 14.

Staff. Hugh son of Geoffrey de Denston not prosecuting his writ of mort d'ancestor against William de Byllesdon and others respecting tenements in Denston, the suit is dismissed, and he and his sureties, viz., Robert de Strongeshulle and Geoffrey, Clerk of Kyngeston, are in misericordiâ. m. 14.

Staff. An assize, etc., if Thomas de Norton the father of Matilda, the wife of Richard de Bentleye, and of Alice the sister of Matilda, was seised as of fee, etc., of thirty-five acres of heath in Norton near Canokbury when he died, etc., and which John Doyly holds. John stated an assize would not lie because the tenements were formerly in seisin of one Roys, who had been the wife of John de Oylley, and that on the Octaves of St. Martin, 6 E. I., a fine was levied between the said John de Oylley, complainant, and the said Roys, impedient, of the manor of Raunton, and of a mill and 40s. rent in Mees, 30s. rent in Holm, 20s. rent in Belyngton, forty acres of wood and heath, and 40s. of rent in Little Wyrele, by which the said Roys acknowledged the said tenements to be the right of him (John), of the gift of the said Roys, and for which concession, etc., the said John conceded to Roys all the said tenements for her life, and to revert after her death to the said John and his heirs, and he stated that the tenements now claimed, formed part of those named in the above fine, and he produced the fine and stated that at the date it was levied the said Richard, Matilda, and Alice, were within the English seas, and of full age, and sound memory, and out of prison, and within a year and a day they had put in no claim. And the said Richard, Matilda, and Alice stated that the tenements now claimed were in Norton and were not named in the fine. The jury found that the said Thomas died seised of the tenements as of fee, and that Matilda and Alice were his nearest heirs, and that Thomas had died within the limits of the assize, and that Thomas had two daughters under age who succeeded to the said tenements and to other tenements by hereditary right, and that the said Roys, by reason of their minority and by right of her lordship (dominicum), had occupied the said tenements, and had held them for her life, and had died seised of them, and they say that the tenements now in dispute were not contained in the fine, and had not passed by her grant from her seisin into the seisin of the said John. The plaintiffs are therefore to recover seisin, and 40s. as damages. m. 14, dorso.

Footnotes

1 This suit shows that the pedigrees given in the Plea Rolls cannot be implicitly trusted. It would be difficult to include more errors in as many sentences than occur in the pedigree given above. Margaret Corbisun must have been a cotemporary of King Stephen, in place of Hen. III. (see the Chillington Charters in Vol. III. of these Collections), and her epoch is thus advanced in the text by about a hundred years.
2 i.e., sufficient to compel his attendance by attachment of his goods.
3 Of Colton in Staffordshire.
4 By this fine James acknowledged the land to be the right of Adam. (Pedes Finium, Stafford., 32 E. I.)
5 By this fine Hugh acknowledged the manor of Haveneyate (Hanyard) to be the right of Roger Toly, Chaplain, as of the gift of Hugh, and for this acknowledgment, etc., Roger granted the said manor to Hugh for his life, and to remain after his death to John son of Hugh and Alice his wife and their issue, and if John died s. p., to revert to right heirs of Hugh. (Pedes Finium, Stafford., 33 E. I.)
6 By this fine Richard acknowledged one-third of the manor of Legh by Tene, saving two messuages and eighty acres of land, to be the right of Adam, as of the gift of Richard, and for which acknowledgment, etc., Adam granted the same to Richard and Lettice his wife, and heirs of the body of Richard, and if Richard should die s. p., to revert to Adam and his heirs. (Pedes Finium, Stafford., 33 E. I.)
7 The reader will note from this suit how little attention was paid to surnames at this date.
8 The reason of this verdict seems to be that Warine Gyffard had never put Gilbert into seisin of the tenements.
9 There is no previous mention of Blithbury in the proceedings as recorded.
10 The reader will observe here the origin of the legal expression, "to pray a tales," and an early example of its use.