De Banco. Hillary, 14–15 E. III.
Placita apud Westmonasterium Coram Rogero Hillary et
Sociis suis Justiciariis domini Regis de Banco.
Letters Patent appointing Roger Hillary Chief Justice of the
Bench, dated from Westminster 8th Jan., 14 E. III., and first year
of France. m. 1.
Staff. A day was given to James de Pype in his suit against Richard de
Stafford, Chivaler, at the Octaves of Trinity on the prayer of the parties and
without essoins. m. 1.
Staff. Alan Bestspede and Joan his wife recover four acres of land in
Cressewalle in a suit against John Perkesone of Cressewalle, and William his
brother, the defendants making default. m. 79.
Staff. Alan Bestspede and Joan his wife sued Richard son of John de
Melewych for a messuage and eight acres of land in Melewych (Millwich).
Richard prayed a view and the suit was adjourned to the Quindene of Trinity.
And they sued John Prestessone of Dulverne for twenty acres of land in Dulverne, and William de Hykelyng for eight acres of land in Cressewalle as the
right of Joan. The defendants prayed a view, and the suit was adjourned to
the same date. m. 89.
Staff. The same Alan and Joan sued Agnes, formerly wife of John de
Rossyngton for a messuage, two carucates of land, 40s. of rent, and the fourth
of a mill in Fossebrok as the right of Joan. Agnes prayed a view, and the suit
was adjourned to the same date. m. 89.
Staff., Northamps. Robert de Haselynden sued Matilda, formerly wife of
Robert de Holand, in a plea that she should warrant to him a messuage and
twelve acres of land in Yoxhale in co. Stafford, which Robert de Ferrars claimed
against him. Matilda did not appear, and the Sheriff returned he had given
the precept to Reginald de Ansty, the Bailiff of the Liberty of Wynton,
who had done nothing in the matter. He was therefore commanded by
writ of "non omittas propter libertatem" to summon him for the Quindene
of Trinity. m. 153.
Staff. Roger Wryde of Stafford sued William de Aston, Parson of the
Church of Rydeware Mauvesyn, and Edmund de Stafford, Parson of the
Church of Draycote, for a debt of 8 marks and a sack of wool worth 10
marks. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff had been ordered to
distrain the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield to produce his Clerks at this
term, and the Sheriff made no return to the writ, and he was ordered to distrain the Bishop to produce his Clerks on the morrow of St. John the Baptist.
m. 165.
Staff. In the suit of John de Barre the elder, against Geoffrey, brother of
John de Barre the younger, and John de Barre the younger, for beating,
wounding, and illtreating him. The Sheriff returned 10d. as proceeds of a
distraint levied on the goods of Geoffrey, and that John de Barre, junior,
could not be found and held nothing by which he could be attached. The
Sheriff was therefore ordered to distrain Geoffrey again, and to put John into
exigend, and if he did not appear, to outlaw him, and if he appeared to arrest
and produce him together with the said Geoffrey at the Quindene of St.
Michael. m. 246.
Staff. Walter de Portes and Margaret his wife sued William de Hondesacre for a third of the manor of Hondesacre excepting thirteen messuages,
four tofts, and two carucates of land in the said manor, as the dower of Margaret,
of the dotation of William de Hondesacre, formerly her husband.
William appeared by attorney and stated that the said Walter and Margaret had no claim to the dower claimed, because the manor of Hondesacre
together with other manors, lands and tenements, formerly belonging to
William her husband, were in seisin of a certain Richard de Bradeleye,
Chaplain, and of a certain John Maynard, Chaplain, after the death of her
husband, and the said Richard and John on the Monday after the Feast of
St. George, 14 E. III, had delivered to the said Walter and Margaret, by
an indented deed, 16 marks of rent in Chorleton, in co. Worcester, to be held
by Margaret as dower in allocation of the whole of her dower from the freehold formerly belonging to William her husband, and of which rent the Plaintiffs were now seised, and he produced the indenture in question, by which
for the above rent they remitted all claim to dower from the lands, etc., held
by William de Hondesacre, formerly the husband of Margaret, in the counties
of Derby, Stafford, Leicester, and Worcester, dated as above, and witnessed
by John de Stafford, Chivaler, Roger Trumwyn, John de Grafton, John le
Bruyn, John de Stone, and others.
And Walter and Margaret could not deny that the said deed was their
act, nor that they had received the said 16 marks of rent in allocation of the
dower of Margaret as above stated. The suit was therefore dismissed, and
they are in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 262.
Staff. Reginald de Batham and Agnes his wife, and Isabella, sister of
Agnes, recover an acre of land in Rideware Mauveysin, from John de Pendeford, and an acre of land from John Wysse, an acre from Juliana de Pendeford, one and half acres from Geoffrey Kex, an acre from John de Crumbford
and Alice his wife, an acre from Henry de Luttelhay and Katrine his wife, an
acre from Emma, formerly wife of William Mauveysyn, and an acre from
Agnes, daughter of Hugh, son of William, which they claimed as the right
of the said Agnes and Isabella, through default of the defendants. m. 267.
Staff. Hugh de Gunston not appearing to prosecute his suit against
Ralph de Thyckebrom for a debt of £20, it was dismissed. m. 273.
Staff. Reginald de Leghe sued Magister Robert de Tene, for making
waste and destruction in lands, houses, woods, and gardens in Leghe, which
he had demised to him for the life of Robert. The defendant did not
appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce him at the Quindene of Easter. m. 285.
Warr. Ralph de Bracebrugge sued Thomas de Halughton and Margaret
his wife, for causing waste and destruction in lands of his inheritance in
Kynesbury, which they held as dower of Margaret, and he stated that they
held one-third of two parts of the manor of Kynesbury of the dotation of
John, son of John de Bracebrugge, formerly husband of Margaret, of the inheritance of the said Ralph, brother and heir of John. Thomas and Margaret
denied the waste and destruction, and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for three weeks from Easter, a view of the waste to be made in the
interim. A postscript shows repeated adjournments of the suit up to Trinity
term, 16 E. III. m. 331.
Staff. Matilda, formerly wife of John de St. Maur, sued John, son of
John de St. Maur, Chivaler, for a third part of the manor of Felde (Field),
which she claimed as 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 five weeks from Easter. m. 343.
Staff. Agnes, formerly wife of John de Benteleye the younger, appeared
by attorney against William de Petlyng, Chaplain, the custos of the person
and lands of John, son of John, son of John de Benteleye, kinsman and heir
of John de Benteleye the elder, in a plea that he should warrant to her the third
of 117 acres of land, thirty acres of meadow, ten acres of moor, and a rent
of £4 in Benteleye, Tresele, and Wolvernehampton, which Beatrice, formerly
wife of John de Benteleye the elder, claimed against her as dower. William
did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take land which he held in
custody, of the value of the dower claimed, into the King's hand, and to
summon him for five weeks from Easter. m. 346.
Staff. Robert, son of Robert de Gresebroke, by his attorney, John de
Gresebrok, sued William, son of William atte Rudyng, for a messuage, forty
acres of land, and four acres of meadow, in Shenstone, which he claimed as his
right. William did not appear, and had previously made default at Michaelmas term, 13 E. III, and the Sheriff had been ordered to take the tenements
into the King's hand, and to summon him for five weeks from Easter, on
which day the Sheriff made no return; and he was ordered as before, and to
summon the defendant for a month from Michaelmas, on which day he made
no return; and he was ordered as before, to take the tenements into the
King's hand, and to summon the defendant for the Octaves of the Purification, and he did nothing and made no return; and he was ordered as before,
and to summon the defendant for the Octaves of St. John the Baptist. A
postscript states that on that day the Sheriff made no return, and he was
ordered as before, and to summon the defendant for the Quindene of St.
Martin. m. 367, dorso.
Salop. Margaret, formerly wife of Roger Body, of Hyntes, sued William,
son of Roger de Hyntes, for the third of four acres of land in Cornleye, which
she claimed as dower. William 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. 343, dorso.
Leyc. James de Stafford and Isabella his wife were summoned by Thomas,
son of John Wichard, of Osberton, in a plea that they should acquit him of
the service which Walter, son of Thomas de Rydeware, exacted from him for
the free tenement he held of the said James and Isabella in Chirchesheyle,
and of which the said James and Isabella were mesne-tenants, and ought
to acquit him, and he stated he held of them a messuage and two virgates of
land, as of the right of Isabella, in Chirche Sheile, by fealty, and the service
of one penny annually, and the said Walter exacted from him fealty and suit
of Court at Sheyle every three weeks, and had levied distraints, by taking
the cattle of his plough, so that he could not cultivate his land.
James and Isabella admitted that the said Thomas held of them as of the
right of Isabella, the above-named tenements by homage and fealty, and the
service of one-fourth of a Knight's fee and a penny yearly, and service at
their Court at Sheyle every three weeks, and could not deny that they ought
to acquit him of the above service, but stated that he had not been distrained
by their default, and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the
Quindene of Trinity. m. 331, dorso.
Staff. The Sheriff had been ordered to distrain Thomas de la Hyde,
Hugh atte Pyrye, John de Engleton, and John Giffard, and produce them in
Court to acknowledge by what services they held their tenements in
Gunstone of Ralph de Thykbrom, and which services the said Ralph had
conceded by fine to Hugh de Gunstone, and likewise to distrain the said
Ralph to appear to complete a fine to be levied between the said Hugh de
Gunstone, complainant, and the said Ralph, deforciant, of a rent of 12s. and
the sixth part of a Knight's fee in Gunstone, as agreed between them, and
the Sheriff now returned certain sums into Court as proceeds of distraints
levied against the said Thomas, Hugh, and Ralph. He was therefore
ordered to distrain again and produce them at three weeks from Easter, and,
as regarded John de Engleton and John Giffard, the Sheriff returned they
were dead, and evidence was given that they were alive. He was therefore
ordered to distrain and produce them at the same time. A postscript states
that at that date the Sheriff made no return, and he was ordered to distrain
and produce them at the Quindene of St. Michael. m. 323, dorso.
Staff. Orabel, daughter of William de Pikstoke of Stafford, sued Richard,
son of Nicholas de Neuport of Stafford, for a messuage and forty-one acres
of land, four acres of meadow, and three acres of pasture in Dunston; and
she sued William de Bromshulf and Alice his wife for thirty acres of land,
three acres of meadow, four acres of pasture, and a rent of 5s.; and she sued
John de Pikstoke of Stafford for four acres of pasture, and Adam le Rotour
of Stafford for two acres of meadow, and William, son of Richard Hervi of
Dunston, for three acres af land in the same vill, as her right. None of the
defendants appeared, and the Sheriff returned the writ reached him too late.
He was therefore ordered to summon them for the Quindene of Trinity. m.
165, dorso.
De Banco. Easter, 15 E. III.
Staff. An assize of last presentation which Stephen de Irton and Joan
his wife arraigned against Geoffrey Byroun and Anabel his wife, respecting
the church of Bydulf, which was vacant, the advowson of which Stephen and
Joan claimed; and they stated one Vivian de Verdon and the said Joan, then
wife of Vivian, were seized of the advowson, temp. E. II, and had pre
sented one Roger de Verdon, who had been admitted and instituted, and by
whose death the church was now vacant.
Anabel stated that she claimed nothing in the advowson except as wife of
the said Geoffrey, and Geoffrey stated that one Alina was seised of the manor
of Bydulf to which the advowson of the church was appurtenant, temp. Ric.
I, and after her death the right descended to Hawise, Petronilla, and Dionisia,
her daughters and heirs, between whom the manor was divided, and likewise
the advowson, so that they presented by turns; and Hawyse was married to
one Henry de Verdon, and from her and Henry the right of her purparty
descended to one Henry, as their son and heir, and from Henry to Henry, as
son and heir, which Henry had enfeoffed one John Tok, Parson of the church
of Grendon, of his purparty of the manor and advowson, who gave it to one
Vivian de Verdon and Joan his wife and the heirs of their bodies.
And the said Petronilla had enfeoffed one Roger, son of Edward de Bydulf,
of her purparty of the manor and advowson; and from the said Roger the
right descended to one Thomas, as son and heir, and from Thomas to Roger,
as son and heir, and from the said Roger to another Roger, as son and heir,
which Roger had enfeoffed John, his son, of his purparty of the manor and
advowson, and whose status the said Geoffrey now held.
And the said Dionisia had given her purparty of the manor and advowson
to one Thomas, son of Roger de Bydulf, in frank marriage with Petronilla,
the daughter of Dionisia, and from the said Thomas and Petronilla the right
descended to one Roger, as son and heir, and from the said Roger to another
Roger, as son and heir, which Roger had enfeoffed of his purparty the said
John, son of Roger, whose status the said Geoffrey now held; and in this
way he held the status of two of the coparceners of the manor and
advowson; and the said Stephen and Joan held the third share, as of the
right of the said Joan, and he prayed judgment on the writ, viz., whether,
under such circumstances an assize of last presentation could be maintained,
and he stated that at the next vacancy of the church, after the partition
between the said Hawyse, Petronilla, and Dionisia, the said Hawise having the
first turn as eldest sister in conjunction with Henry de Verdon, her husband,
had presented one Odo le Chapeleyn, who had been admitted and instituted,
temp. Ric. I; and after the death of the said Odo, the said Roger, son of
Thomas, holding the status of Petronilla, presented to the church one
Nicholas Coly, who was admitted and instituted temp. Hen. III, and after
the death of the said Nicholas, the said Roger, son of Roger, son of Thomas,
holding the status of Dionisia, being negligent and remiss, had permitted
Henry, son of Henry, son of Henry, to usurp the presentation, and he had
presented to the church one Magister Alexander de Verdon, who had been
admitted and instituted temp. E. I, and after the death of the said
Alexander, the said Vivian and Joan, who is now the wife of the said Stephen,
recommencing the turn, had presented one Magister Roger de Verdon, who
had been admitted and instituted temp. E. II, and by whose death the
church was now vacant; and this being the fifth vacancy since the partition of
the manor and advowson, its presentation pertained to him, the said Geoffrey,
as holding the status of the said Petronilla, and he prayed the usual writ to
the Bishop.
And the said Stephen and Joan, without acknowledging the seisin of the
said Alina, nor that Hawise, Petronilla, and Dionisia, were her daughters
and heirs, stated that the said Hawise, Petronilla, and Dionisia were seised
of the said manor, etc., which had been partitioned between them as Geoffrey
alleged, and that the said Hawise was married to Henry de Verdon, and
likewise that Petronilla had enfeoffed the said Roger, son of Edward, of her
purparty, and that the said Dionisia gave her purparty to the said Thomas,
son of Roger, in frank marriage with Petronilla, daughter of Dionisia, but
they stated that the said Roger, son of Edward, gave half an acre of land in
Bydulf and the third part of the advowson of the church, to the said Henry
de Verdon and Hawise and their heirs, in exchange for certain other tenements in the same vill, and the said Thomas and Petronilla, his wife, in the
same way gave to the said Henry de Verdon and Hawise, and their heirs
half an acre of land and the third part of the advowson in exchange for
other tenements in the same vill, so that the said Henry and Hawise were
sole advocates of the church in the time of King Richard, and had presented
the said Odo in that capacity. And Henry and Hawyse had issue, Henry,
son and heir; and this Henry had issue another Henry, son and heir, which
Henry, after the death of Odo, had presented the said Nicholas Coly, whom
Geoffrey supposed to have been presented by the said Roger, son of Thomas.
And at the next vacancy he had presented the said Magister Alexander as
Geoffrey stated, but not by an usurpation, but as true patron and sole
advocate; and afterwards the said Henry had given the advowson and other
lands and tenements in Bydulf and other vills to the said John Tok and his
heirs, and the said John had given the same advowson and lands to Vivian
and Joan; and the said Stephen and Joan therefore in right of the said
Joan are sole advocates of the church, as they are prepared to verify by the
assize, and by which right the said Joan, in conjunction with Vivian, her
husband, had presented the last parson, and they prayed the usual writ to
the Bishop.
Geoffrey in his reply repeated the same story as he gave above, and
put himself on the assize. And Stephen and Joan did the same. The assize
was therefore to be taken, but was respited till the Morrow of the Ascension
through defect of recognitors. A postscript states that the process was
continued till the Octaves of Trinity, when a writ of nisi prius was issued
transferring the cause to be heard at Lichfield before R. de Bankwelle on the
Wednesday in the week of Pentecost, on which day the said Stephen and
Joan appeared in proprià personâ before Roger de Bankwelle with whom
was associated Richard de Stafford, Knight. And the said Stephen, being
solemnly called did not appear, and the assize was taken in his absence, and
the recognitors of the assize stated on their oaths that the said Vivian de
Verdon and Joan his wife, now the wife of the said Stephen, last presented
to the church of Bydulf, one Roger de Verdon, in right of the said Vivian
and Joan in a time of peace, in the reign of the King's father, and the said
Roger had been admitted and instituted on their presentation, and that the
church was now vacant, and they stated, that the vacancy began on the
Monday before Christmas Day last part, on which day the said Stephen was
in London, and they say that the church was worth according to its true
value, 40 marks. It was therefore considered that the said Stephen and
Joan should recover their presentation to the church, and their damages,
viz., 20 marks, the half value of the church, the "tempus semestre" not having
elapsed, and the usual writ was issued to the Bishop. m. 37.
Staff. Baldewyn, son of Alexander de Fryville, Chivaler, and Henry
Hillary, Chivaler, were summoned by Ralph le Botiller of Nortbury, Chivaler,
in a plea that they should permit him to present a fit person to the Prebend
of Wygynton and Cumberford of the church of St. Edith of Tamworde,
which was vacant, and of which the donation belonged to him. And the said
Ralph stated that one Philip Marmyon was seised of the advowson of the
Prebend temp. E. I, and had presented to it one Ralph de Hengham, who
had been admitted and instituted, and from the said Philip the right of the
advowson descended to Joan, Mazera, Matilda, and to Joan, formerly the
wife of Henry Hillary, as his daughters and heirs, and from the said Joan
the eldest, as she died s.p., the right of her purparty descended to the said
Mazera, Matilda, and Joan, formerly wife of Henry Hillary, as her sisters
and heirs, and from the said Mazera the right of her purparty descended to
one Joan, the wife of Alexander de Fryvill, as daughter and heir, and from
the said Joan to one Baldewyne de Fryville, as son and heir; and from the
said Matilda the right of her purparty descended to one Ralph le Botiller
as son and heir; between which Alexander de Fryville and Joan his wife,
Ralph le Botiller, and Henry Hillary and Joan his wife, a certain composition was made, viz., that the said Alexander and Joan his wife, having the
first turn in right of the said Joan, should present to the Prebend when it
became vacant, and that the said Ralph should present to it the second turn,
and on a third vacancy that the said Henry Hillary and Joan should
present, in right of the said Joan, and so on in succession, and by virtue
of the said composition, the said Alexander de Fryville and Joan his wife,
had presented to the Prebend one Henry le Notte who had been admitted
and instituted, temp. E. II, and by whose death, the Prebend was now
vacant, and he stated that it now pertained to him, the said Ralph, to present
by reason of his second turn, as settled by the said composition, and that
he was impeded by the said Baldewyne and Henry, from whom he claimed
£40 as damages.
Baldewyne appeared in person, and did not deny that the said Ralph
ought to present this turn to the Prebend. And the said Henry appeared
by attorney, and stated he had issue by Joan, formerly his wife, so that he
had the right of presentation at the third turn by the courtesy of England,
n right of Margaret, daughter and heir of Thomas de Lodelowe, the heir
of the said Joan, formerly his wife, and saving his right of presentation to
the third vacancy, he did not deny the right of the said Ralph to present
this time. It was therefore considered that the said Ralph should recover
the presentation to the Prebend against the said Baldewyne and Henry, and
a writ was issued to the Bishop, and Ralph remitted his claim for damages.
m. 82.
Staff. Nicholas de Chaveleye sued John de Sutton, of Abbots Bromley, in
a plea that he should warrant to him a messuage and nine acres of land in
Rydeware Mauveysin and Colton, which Philip de Barre, of Blythebury,
claimed against him. John did not appear, and 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 the Octaves of St. Michael. A postscript states that at that date the Sheriff made no return, and he was
ordered as before, and to summon him for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 117.
Essex, Staff. Thomas de Tochewyk appeared by attorney against Hugh,
son of Hugh le Blount, in a plea that he should warrant to him the manor
of Yengioiberd Laundry, in co. Essex, which John, son of John de Weston,
claimed against him, and he had been summoned in both of the above
counties and did not appear. The Sheriff of Essex was therefore 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 Michaelmas. m.
165. (fn. 1)
Staff. Ralph de Stafford appeared by Hugh de Aston, his attorney,
against John Trussel of Cublesdon, Chivaler, Thomas de Brynton, John de
Podemore, and Robert Balle, of Blorton, for unlawfully abducting from
Walton, near Stone, William, son and heir of Richard de Venables, who
was under age, whose marriage belonged to him. None of the defendants
appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce them at the
Quindene of Trinity, and to enquire diligently in the interin, into the place
of abode of the heir, and if found, to keep him in safe custody and produce
him at the same date. m. 223.
Staff. Alianora, formerly wife of John de Parles, of Watford, not
appearing to prosecute her suit for dower in Hondesworth against Joan
Botetourt, the plea was dismissed. m. 268.
Staff. Robert de Swynnerton appeared by attorney against Roger le
Wrighte, of Stafford, Elias le Parchemyner, and Nicholas de Leye, in a plea
that they should render a reasonable account for the time they were his
bailiffs in Bradeleye, near Stafford. The defendants did not appear, and the
Sheriff returned they held nothing by which they could be attached. He
was therefore ordered to arrest and produce them at the Quindene of St.
Michael. m. 289, dorso.
Staff. William le Webbe and Emma his wife, and William de Bylynton,
of Shradicote, and Felicia his wife, sued Henry de Kenelleworth for three
acres of land and two acres of meadow in Great Sardon, and they sued John,
brother of Henry de Kenileworth, for five acres in the same vill, which they
claimed as the right of Emma and Felicia. The defendants did not appear,
and the said Henry had called to warranty John de Keneleworth, and the
said John, brother of Henry, called to warranty Griffin de la Pole, of Great
Sardon. The Sheriff was ordered to take the tenements into the King's
hand, and to summon the parties for three weeks from Michaelmas. m. 272,
dorso.
Staff. Matilda, formerly wife of John de St. Maur, sued John, son of
John de St. Maur, Chivaler, for a third of the manor of Felde, as her dower;
John had made default, and the Sheriff had been ordered to take the
dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon the parties for this day,
and he made no return. He was therefore ordered to summon them for the
Octaves of St. John the Baptist. m. 264, dorso.
Northamp. The same Matilda sued the said John for a third part of six
messuages, three and a half virgates of land, forty acres of wood, and a rent of
a pound of pepper in Herdewyk as her dower, and John had made default,
and the dower claimed had been taken into the King's hand, and Matilda
now claimed it by his default. John appeared by attorney and denied the
summons, and offered to wage his law; he was therefore to appear with his
compurgators at the Quindene of St. Martin. m. 264, dorso.
Staff. Adam de Morton and William his son, and John, brother of
William, and Thomas de Morton, were attached to answer the plea of
William de Morton, Clerk, that they, together with John, son of John de
Morton, Robert de Orselowe, and Robert de Ruyton had forcibly taken him
from Morton, in Gnousale, on the Wednesday after the Feast of St. Ambrose,
12 E. III, and imprisoned him at Lilleshull, in co. Salop, until he had made
a fine with them for £40, and for taking his horse worth £20, and for which
he claimed £100 as damages. The defendants appeared by attorney, and
pleaded that the plaintiff by the name of William de Morton, Parson of the
Church of Holm, near Mare, had pardoned, released, and quit-claimed to
them all actions, claims, and demands; dated from Lilleshull, in co. Salop,
on the Wednesday above named.
William denied that the deed was executed by him, and appealed to a
jury, which is to be summoned for the Octaves of St. Michael. A postcript
shows the suit was adjourned from time to time up to Michaelmas, 18 E.
III. m. 207.
Staff. Alianora, formerly wife of William Griffyn, sued Nicholas le
Mareschal for a third of a messuage and two virgates and a half of land, ten
acres of meadow, and 10s. of rent in Clyfton Caunville as dower. Nicholas
called to warranty William, son of John Gryffyn, kinsman and heir of
William Gryffyn, who is to be summoned for the Octaves of Trinity. m. 44,
dorso.
De Banco. Mich., 15 E. III.
Staff. William de Mollesleye sued John, son of Thomas de Bradeleye,
and Nicholas, his brother, John, son of John de Heronville, Chivaler, and John,
son of John Dymmok, for coming vi et armis to his fish ponds at Bliston (sic)
(Bilston), and taking fish to the value of 100s. None of the defendants
appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce them at the
Octaves of Hillary. m. 34.
Salop. Richard atte Lane of Wolverhampton, was summoned by William
de Ercalewe, to render to him a reasonable account for the time he was the
receiver of his money. William stated that when the said Richard was his
receiver, viz., on the Friday before the Feast of St. Gregory the Pope, 19 E.
II, up to the said Feast of St. Gregory, he had received of his money at
Salop and at Stafford, £600; viz., at Salop he had received from Ralph de
Camoys, £180; from Robert Tochet, 30s.; from John de Bradestan, 10s.;
from Henry de Bysshebury, 60s.; from the Prior of Lappeleye, 16s. 8d.;
from the Prior of Crokesdene, 6s. 8d.; from John de Somervile, 20s.; from
the Prior of Wenlok, 40s.; from John de Hambury, 10s.; from Richard de
Hampton, 13s. 4d.; from the Prior of the Hospital of St. John in England,
20s.; from William, son of Robert de Acton, 2 marks; from John de
Mere, 6s. 8d.; from John de Brehull, 5 marks; from John de Lauton, 10s.;
from William Byron, 10s.; from Peter Gerard, 13s. 4d.; from Roger Carles,
10s.; from William de Wasteneys, 13s. 4d.; from Henry de Crassewalle,
20s.; from William de Shewynde (sic) Chetwynde, 4 marks; from Nicholas
de Pycheford, 2 marks; from John de Stafford and William, his brother,
60s.; from Robert Bonenfaunt, 10s.; from Thomas Tochet, 10s.; from
William de Chylyton, 10s.; from Adam Randolf, 10s.; from Hamon
Bouche, 10s.; from Richard, son of Robert de Oneleye, 13s. 4d.; from
William, son of Henry de Stratton, 13s. 4d.; from Roger de Stratton,
13s. 4d.; from Thomas de Pype, 10s.; from Richard, son of Richard Bernard, 20s.; from Henry Godereye, 16s.; from John atte More, 10s.; from
John Wyther, 13s. 4d.; from Richard, son of Philip de Poleleye, 20s.; from
William de Freford, 5 marks; from Adam de Stepelton, 13s. 4d.; from
Walter de Gatacre, 20s.; from Richard de Dulverne, £40; from Hugh de
Pycheford, £40; from Roger de Midelton, £40; from Roger de Muryden,
£40; from Thomas Purfrey, £40; and from John Gogh, £20. And he had
received at Stafford from Thomas Hillary, £10; from John de Ruggeleye, £10;
from John de Bysshebury, £10; from John de Wyrleye, £20; from Richard
Tokery, £20; from Roger de Assheleye, £10; from Philip de Ipstanes,
£20; from Henry de Shene, £10; from Henry de Wotton, £10; from
Richard de la Boure, £10; from Stephen Bythewater of Salt, £10; from
William de Lockeleye, £10; from William atte Lowe, £8 17s. 4d.; for the
use of the said William de Ercalewe, and although the said Richard had been
frequently required to render an account of the said receipts, he had hitherto
refused to do so, and for which he claimed £1000 as damages.
Richard appeared in person, and stated that the said William unjustly
exacted an account from him, because he had, on the Monday after the Feast
of the Ascension, 1 E. III, at Ercalewe, in co. Salop, before William del Hulle,
at that time sub-Sheriff of cos. Salop and Stafford, and Sir Richard de
Brugg, Canon of Haughmon, auditors assigned by the said William de
Ercalewe, to hear his accounts, fully accounted to the said William for all
the time he was receiver of his money, and had satisfied him for all arrears
owing to him, and he appealed to a jury.
William denied that the said Richard had rendered any account for the
time stated, and appealed likewise to a jury, and the Sheriff of co. Salop
was ordered to summon a jury for the Octaves of Hillary. And Roger de
Elyngton, Hugh de Aston, Roger de Aston, Richard de Aston, and William
de Whytyngton of co. Stafford, (fn. 2) stood bail to produce the said Richard at
the above term, and from day to day afterwards until a jury had found a
verdict. m. 38.
Staff. Robert de Ferrars appeared by attorney against John de Grese
eye, for breaking vi et armis into his park at Chartelye, and chasing and
capturing his wild animals. John did not appear, and the Sheriff was
ordered to distrain and produce him at the Octaves of Hillary. m. 38.
Staff. Roger, the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, was summoned to
answer Robert de Kyldesby, the Prebendary of Berkeswich, in the Church
of St. Cedde of Lichfield, in a plea that he should permit him to present a
fit person to the vicariate of the Church of Berkeswych, which was vacant,
and of which the donation belonged to him; and he stated that one Dionisius, his predecessor, had presented to the said vicariate by virtue of his
Prebend, one William de Chaddesdene, in the reign of King Edward I, and
who had been admitted and instituted, and after his resignation, one
Arnulph, then Prebendary, through negligence, had permitted Roger de
Meland, then Bishop, to present, through lapse of time, one William de Boys,
and caused him to be inducted in the same reign, viz., temp. E. I, and by
whose death the vicariate was now vacant.
The Bishop appeared by attorney, and denied that the said Dionisius
had presented the said William de Chaddesden, and he stated that
Roger de Meland, the Bishop, had given the vicariate to one William de
Lenche, and had inducted him, temp. E. I, and after his resignation he
had given it to the said William de Boys, who had been inducted, temp.
E. I, and he appealed to a jury. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to
summon a jury for the Octaves of St. Martin. A postscript shews that the
process was continued till Easter, 16 E. III, when a writ nisi was issued
and the cause was heard at Wolverhampton on the Monday before the
Close of Easter before Roger Hillary and Roger de Bankwell, when a jury
returned a verdict in favour of the Bishop. m. 136.
Staff. Thomas de Wasteneys, Chivaler, sued John, son of John le Countour, and William, son of Adam le Smyth, of Colton, for six acres of land i
Colton. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take
half the land into the King's hand, and to summon them for the Quindene
of Hillary. A postscript states that on that date the Sheriff made no return,
and the case was adjourned to the Quindene of Trinity. m. 152.
Staff. Alan Bestspede and Joan, his wife, sued Agnes, formerly wife of
John de Rossynton, for a messuage and two carucates of land, 40s. of rent, and
one-fourth of a mill in Fossebrok (Forsbrook), as the right of the said Joan,
of the gift of Richard, son of Richard de Cressewalle, who had enfeoffed her
and Ralph de Cressewalle, formerly her husband, in the tenements, and in
which Agnes had no entry except by a demise made by the said Ralph to
Richard de Cressewalle, and to which she could not object during the lifetime
of her husband. Agnes defended her right, and stated that the said Joan held
nothing in the tenements in question of the gift of the said Richard, son of
Richard, and appealed to a jury which is to be summoned for three weeks
from Easter. m. 376.
Staff. Thomas de Rolleston recovers a messuage in Horecross from Roger
le Grant, and seven acres of land in the same vill, from Joan, formerly wife
of Ralph de Arderne, the defendants making default. m. 396.
Staff. Thomas de Tomenhorn sued Margaret de Greseleye and Edmund,
her son, and Nicholas Geffrey, for unjustly taking his cattle. The defendants
did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce them at
this term, and he made no return. He was therefore ordered to attach them
for the Morrow of the Purification. m. 410.
Staff. Richard de Levessone and Nicholas de Wythwyke, the executors
of John atte Lowe, sued Richard, son of Reginald de Pelshale for a debt of
5 marks. Richard did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to produce
him on the Morrow of the Purification. m. 410.
Staff. John de Swyneshed sued Matilda, formerly wife of Adam de
Swyneshed, for causing waste and destruction in houses and gardens which
she held in dower of his inheritance in Eccleshale. Matilda did not appear,
and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce her on the Morrow of
the Purification. m. 410.
Staff. Roger de Elyngton, Parson of the church of Alrewych (Aldridge), sued Philip, son of Hugh Aleyn, of Wodnesbury, Chaplain, Thomas
Frebody, and Richard Dylon for forcibly taking his horse worth 20s. from
Honesworth, and other goods and chattels worth 100s., and for beating and
wounding William le Spenser, his servant, so that he lost his services for a
long time. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff returned they
held nothing by which they could be attached. He was therefore ordered
to arrest and produce them on the Octaves of Hillary, on which day the
Sheriff made no return, and he was ordered to produce them at three weeks
from Easter. m. 443.
Staff. In the suit respecting a messuage, four carucates of land, half
a mill, and 6s. of rent in Melewych, which Alice, daughter of William
Gilbert, claimed under the terms of a fine levied in 7 E. I. The tenants of
the land, etc., claimed, appeared to their summonses by attorney, and
Alice prayed for execution, and Nicholas le Warner and Alice his wife,
and two others, stated that one Robert de Melewych was seised of
the tenements in demesne as of fee, and after his death they descended
to one Thomas, his son and heir, and Thomas assigned them to one
Petronilla, formerly wife of the said Robert to be held as dower, and the
same Thomas, whilst Petronilla was in seisin of them, remitted and quitclaimed to her all his right in them, to be held of him for the service of a
pair of gloves. And the said Petronilla afterwards alienated the same tenements to one William de Pixstoke, whose status they now held in the tenements, and they said that at the date of the fine, the said Thomas held nothing
in the tenements except the rent of a pair of gloves, and this they were
prepared to prove. Alice, in her reply, stated that at the date of the
fine the said Thomas held the fee of the tenements, and appealed to a jury
which is to be summoned for the Quindene of Easter. A postscript states
that the process was continued till Michaelmas, 20 E. III, when a jury,
delivered a verdict in favour of Alice, stating that at the date of the fine
Thomas held the fee of the tenements in question.
The tenants dispossessed under this verdict were Nicholas le Warner and
Alice his wife, who held an acre of land; John, son of John de Shorthull,
who held a rent of 3s., and Alianora, formerly wife of Richard in the Hay,
who held one-fourth of a carucate of land. William, son of Richard de Venables,
who held two parts of two parts of a carucate of land, stated by his custos that,
one Robert de Melewych, was seised of the said tenements in demesne as of fee
and died seised of them, and after his death the said Thomas de Melewych entered
as son and heir, and assigned the said two parts to Petronilla to be held as
dower, and Thomas had afterwards released and quit-claimed to her all his
rights in them together with other lands and tenements for the service of a
pair of gloves; and the said Petronilla had enfeoffed William de Pixstoke of
the tenements, who had died seised of them, and after his death one Thomas de
Pixstoke had entered as his son and heir, and the said Thomas had enfeoffed
Richard de Venables his father, and as the said William, son of Richard is
now under age, he prayed that the suit might remain till his full age.
Hugh le Chapman, another tenant, stated he held his tenement, viz., half a
virgate of land, for term of his life by a demise made by Thomas de Pixstoke,
who also granted the reversion of it to one Richard de Venables, and by virtue
of which reversion he had attorned himself to the said Richard, and Richard
was dead, and the reversion descended to William, son of Richard, without
whom he could not bring the said tenement to judgment, and the said
William was under age.
William de Wotton and Isabella, his wife, stated they held their tenement,
viz., one-third of a carucate of land, as dower of Isabella, of the dotation of
Thomas de Pixstoke, and by the assignment of Richard de Venables, and the
reversion of it belonged to William, son and heir of Richard, who was under
age.
Richard de Cheseworthyn and Alice his wife, stated they held their
tenement, viz., one-third of two parts of a carucate of land, as dower of
Alice, of the dotation of Richard de Venables, of the inheritance of the said
William, and the reversion belonged to the said William, son of Richard, who
was under age.
John, son of William le Taillour, tenant of a fourth of a virgate of land,
did not appear, and Alice prayed for execution against him; and William
Tynte and Elena his wife, stated they held the whole tenement, the said
John holding nothing in it, and they held it for the life of Elena, by a demise
made by Thomas de Pixstoke, who had granted the reversion of it to
Richard de Venables, and his heirs, and Richard had died, and the right in
the reversion had fallen to William, son and heir of Richard, without whom
they could not bring the tenement to judgment, and he was under age.
Alice, daughter of William (the Plaintiff) replied that William, son of
Richard, was of full age, and she prayed he might be viewed by the Court.
The Sheriff was therefore ordered to produce him in Court, at the Quindene
of Easter, so that the Justices might judge by his aspect, whether he was of
full age or not. A postscript states that the said William, son of Richard,
appeared in Court at the above date, and as Alice could not deny he was
under age, the suit was to remain till his full age. m. 505.
Staff. William Trussebut, whom Ralph, son of Ralph Basset, of Chedle,
whom Richard Bassett, of Chedle, whom Ralph Bassett, of Chedle, and Joan,
his wife, called to warranty and who warranted the tenements to them,
appeared by attorney against James de Stafford, Knight, in a plea that he
should warrant to him the third of a messuage, and twenty-five acres of land,
and seven and a half acres of meadow in Dulverne (Dilhorn), which Alice,
formerly wife of Robert le Rotour, of Stafford, claimed as dower. James
did not appear and had previously made default, and the Sheriff had been
ordered to take into the King's hand land belonging to him, to the value of
the dower claimed, and the Sheriff now returned that the said James held no
lands or tenements within his bailiwick, and it was testified that he held
sufficient. The Sheriff was therefore ordered as before to take lands, etc.,
belonging to him into the King's hand, and to summon him for the Octaves
of the Purification. m. 516.
Staff. Thomas, son of Roger de Swynnerton, sued Robert, son of Roger
de Swynnerton, to warrant to him the manor of Adbaston, which John, son
of John Baldewyn, of Salop, claimed against him, and he did not appear, and
had previously made default, and the Sheriff had been ordered to take land
belonging to him, to the value of the tenements claimed, into the King's hand,
and to summon him for this date, and the Sheriff now returned that the writ
reached him too late, and he was therefore ordered again by writ of "non
omittas propter libertatem Episcopi Cestrensis," to take lands belonging to him,
etc., as before, and to summon him for five weeks from Easter. A postscript
shows repeated adjournments of the suit up to Hillary term, 16–17, E. III.
m. 516.
Staff. Joan, formerly wife of Roger Purcel, of Bisshebury, sued Henry
de Bisshebury, Chivaler, and Amice his wife, for a third of the manor of la
Sernore, 100 acres of land, forty acres of meadow, sixty acres of pasture, and
£10 of rent in Bisshebury, and she sued Thomas atte Broke, of Bisshebury,
for a third of three messuages, sixty acres of land, thirty acres of meadow,
and forty acres of pasture in the same vill; and she sued Thomas, son of
Thomas atte Brok, for a third of a messuage, sixty acres of land, thirty acres
of meadow, and sixty acres of pasture in the same vill; and she sued Robert,
son of Thomas atte Brok, and Roger his brother, for a third of a messuage,
sixty acres of land, thirty acres of meadow, and sixty acres of pasture in the
same vill, as dower. The defendants appeared by attorney and prayed a
view, and the suit was adjourned to the Octaves of the Purification. m. 549.
Staff. Simon de Ruggeleye sued John Gentyl in a plea that he had
forcibly broken into his close at Longedon, and cut down his trees to the
value of £10. John did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain
and produce him at the Octaves of Hillary. m. 495, dorso.
Staff. John, son of Hugh de Tymmor, sued John le Pypere, Chaplain, for
a book worth 40s., which he unjustly detained. The defendant did not
appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to attach him for the Octaves of Hillary.
m. 495, dorso.
Derb. Richard de Curzon, Parson of the Church of Breydeshale, sued
Geoffrey de Skeftyngton, for four messuages, four acres and a half of land,
and twenty acres of wood, in Bredeshale (and which had been valued at
21s. 6d.), which Robert de Duyn gave to Sampson de Duyn, and heirs of his
body, and failing such to Hugh de Duyn, and heirs of his body, and which after
the death of the said Sampson and Hugh should remain to him as kinsman
and heir of the said Hugh, Sampson having died without leaving issue; and
Geoffrey had called to warranty James, son of Nicholas de Audele, who had
been summoned in cos. Stafford and Derby, and who now appeared by
attorney to the summons made in co. Stafford, and prayed it might be shown
why he should warrant the tenements, and Geoffrey stated that one James
de Audethelega, the great grandfather of James, son of Nicholas, and whose
heir he is, had conceded by deed to Geoffrey, son of John de Skeftyngton, the
father of Geoffrey, and whose heir he is, the manor of Breydeshale, of which
the tenements in question were a parcel, to be held by the said Geoffrey and
his heirs, and with a clause of warranty, and he produced the deed, and
James, son of Nicholas, did not deny the deed, but stated he held nothing in
fee simple by hereditary descent from the said James, his great grandfather,
but nevertheless as heir of blood of the said James, he warranted the tenements to the said Geoffrey.
And Richard then stated that the said Robert de Duyn gave the tenements
to the said Sampson, by which gift Sampson was seised of them temp. E. I,
and he died s.p., and the tenements remained to the said Hugh, and
from Hugh the right descended to one Joan as daughter and heir, and from
Joan to one Richard, as son and heir, and from the said Richard to the
plaintiff, as son and heir.
And James, son of Nicholas, stated that the said Richard had no claim to
the tenements, because one Sampson le Duy (sic), his great grandfather, had
granted them to the said James, son of Nicholas, under the name of James
de Audideley, together with other tenements in the vill of Bredsale, to be
held by him and his heirs, and with a clause of warranty, and he called on
the said Richard, as kinsman and heir of Sampson, to warrant them to him,
and he produced the deed. And Richard denied that the deed produced was
the act of the said Sampson, and appealed to a jury and the witnesses to the
deed. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to summon a jury for three weeks
from Easter, together with Thomas de Meingware (sic Menilwarin ?), Robert de
Stokeford (sic Stokeport ?), William Patryk, Patric de Heselwelle, William de
Wystanton, John de Baskervyle, Warine de Menigware, Knights, Walter de
Scaccario, Geoffrey de Skyftenton, Jurdan de Pivelesdon, Thomas de
Haurthyn, and Roger de Maclesfeld, Clerk, the witnesses named in the deed,
and it was to be noted that the same deed had been produced in another plea,
as appears in the records of Michaelmas term, 13 E. III, roll 466, and
remains in the custody of Adam de Stayngrave, the King's Clerk. m. 350
dorso.
Staff. John, son of Richard de Ripariis (Rivers), Knight, (militis), sued
Alexander, Prior of Tuttebury, for 90 marks, the arrears of an annual rent of
20 marks, owing to him. The Prior did not appear, and the Sheriff had done
nothing and made no return. He was therefore ordered as before to distrain
and produce him at the Quindene of Hillary. m. 347, dorso.
Staff. Thomas de Arderne, Chivaler, sued Thomas de Pype, in a plea that he
should render a reasonable account for the time he was his bailiff in Rydeware
Hamstal. The defendant did not appear and the Sheriff made no return. He
was therefore ordered to attach him for the Quindene of Hillary. A postscript
states that at that date the Sheriff made no return, and he was ordered to
attach him for the Quindene of Trinity. m. 324, dorso.
Staff. Roger, the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, sued John de Ryvers,
Parson of the church of Hambury, for a debt of £15, and John had not
appeared, and the Sheriff had been ordered to distrain Roger the Bishop to
produce the said John, his Clerk. And he now returned he had levied a
distress, and paid into Court half a mark as proceeds of it, and the Sheriff was
ordered to distrain again and produce the said John at the Octaves of Hillary.
A postscript states that on that date the Sheriff had no return, and he was
ordered to produce him at three weeks from Easter. m. 308, dorso.
Staff. James de Pype, who was of full age, sued Richard de Stafford,
Chivaler, for the manor of Pype, excepting two messuages, by a writ of entry.
Richard prayed a view, and the suit was adjourned to the Quindene of Easter.
m. 284.
Staff. Robert de Mere of Burton and Matilda his wife sued William, son
of William le Hunte of Burton, for a messuage in Burton-upon-Trent which
Henry le Lyttestere gave to Robert de Charteleye, and Agnes his wife, and the
heirs of their bodies, and which should descend to them by the form of the
gift; and they stated that Robert de Charteley and Agnes were seised of the
tenement by the above gift, temp. E. II, and from them the right descended to
Matilda, their daughter and heir.
William defended his right and pleaded that the said Henry had not given
the messuage to Robert and Agnes as stated by the plaintiffs, and appealed
to a jury, which is to be summoned for the Quindene of Hillary. m. 143, dorso.
Staff. Agnes, formerly wife of Robert de la Shote of Dulverne, sued
Richard Aleyn of Dulverne for a third of a messuage and twenty acres of
land in Dulverne as her dower. Richard did not appear, and the Sheriff was
ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and to summon him
for this term. And the Sheriff now returned the writ reached him too late,
and he was ordered as before to take the dower claimed into the King's hand,
and to summon him for the Quindene of Hillary. m. 143, dorso.
Staff. William de Walton sued Amice, daughter of Gilbert de Gorsthull of
Lichefeld, and Joan, her sister, for a messuage and seven and a half acres of
land in Lichefeld and Morghale by a writ of entry. Amice and Joan
called to warranty William le Champioun, who appeared by his attorney,
Richard de Engleton, and warranted the tenements to them; and called to
warranty Richard le Bole and Joan his wife, and Richard de Fulfen and Amice
his wife, daughters and heirs of Gilbert de Gorsthull, who are to be summoned
for the Quindene of Hillary. A postscript shews repeated adjournments of
the suit up to Easter, 17 E. III. m. 140, dorso.
Staff. Richard de Swynnerton sued John de Westone, Parson of the Church
of Little Grantesdon, for a debt of £1,000; and he stated that whereas the
said John on the 7th March, 12 E. III, in London, in the parish of St.
Nicholas nearle Flesshomeles of London, bound himself to him by a deed in a sum
of £1,000 to be rendered in the church of St. Paul of London, viz., at the Feast
of the Nativity of St. John the Baptist next following, £500, and at the
Feast of St. Martin in the winter, £500, the said John although frequently
called up to pay the said sum to him had refused, and still refuses to do so,
and for which he claimed £2,000 as damages, and he produced the bond above
named.
John appeared by attorney and pleaded that he should not be required to
answer to the writ, because at the date named he was not the parson of the
church of Little Grantesdene, and appealed on this issue to a jury, and
Richard likewise; and as Little Grantesdene is in co. Kent, the Sheriff of
that county was ordered to summon a jury for the Octaves of St. Martin. A
postscript states that the process was continued till Trinity term, 16 E. III,
when a jury from the co. of Kent returned a verdict that at the date of the
bond the said John was Parson of the church of Little Grantesdene, as
Richard stated in the writ, and they assessed his damages for the detention of
the debt at £60. Richard is therefore to recover his debt and the above
damages. m. 123, dorso.
Staff. Thomas son of William de Morteyn sued Philip de Stepelton for
two mills in Great Barre, and Philip did not appear and had previously made
default, and the mills had been taken into the King's hand, and Thomas now
claimed them through the default of the defendant; and upon this one Robert,
son of Philip de Stepelton, appeared and stated that the said Thomas ought
not to have seisin of them, because he (the said Robert) was seised of them
in demesne as of fee and had demised them to the said Philip for his life only,
and the reversion of them belonged to him and to his heirs.
And Thomas stated that the said Robert should not be admitted to defend
the suit on this plea because at the date of the writ, namely, 4th July, 11 E.
III, the said Philip held the tenements in fee, and he appealed to a jury, which
is to be summoned for the Morrow of the Purification. A postscript shews
repeated adjournments of the case up to Trinity term, 18 E. III. m. 84,
dorso.
Staff. Richard Russel, who sued for the King, appeared against Richard the
Prior of Sondwall, Simon, son of William de Burmingham, William le Mercer,
and Richard and Roger his brothers, Magister John Blount, and Edmund le
Prioursprest of Sondwell, in a plea, that whereas the advowson of the Prebend
of Codeshale was annexed to the Deanery of the King's Free Chapel of St.
Michael of Tetenhale, and the King's beloved Clerk, William de Sheynton,
lately Dean of the said King's Chapel, had conferred the Prebend then vacant
on Louis de Chertelon, and the same Louis by virtue of the said collation
had been "adeptus" and the King had forbidden any one to make
appeals, citations, monitions or processes against the said Louis, or
to presume to attempt anything in derogation of the King's patronage;
the said Prior and the others above named, intending to impugn the rights of
the King and of his Crown, and to enervate the King's right of patronage,
had made or procured certain appeals, citations, etc., and other impediments to
the manifest enervation of the King's patronage, etc. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff had been ordered to attach them, and had done
nothing, but returned they held nothing by which they could be attached,
and it was testified that the Prior held sufficient in the county; the Sheriff
was therefore ordered to attach him for the Quindene of Hillary, and to arrest
the others and produce them at the same date. A postscript states that on
that date the Sheriff made no return to the writ, and he was ordered to attach
them for the Quindene of Trinity. m. 75 dorso.
Staff. Nicholas le Mareschal appeared by attorney against William, son of
John Gryffyn, kinsman and heir of William Gryffyn, in a plea that he should
warrant to him the third part of a messuage, two virgates and a half, and ten
acres of land, and a rent of 10s. in Clyfton Camvile, which Alianora, formerly
wife of Willian Gryffyn, claimed as dower. William did not appear, and the
Sheriff returned the writ reached him to late. He was therefore ordered to
summon him for the Octaves of Hillary on the prayer of the Plaintiff, and the
attorney of Nicholas was told by the Court that he must sue at his own peril. (fn. 3)
m. 43, dorso.
Staff. Sarra, formerly wife of Thomas de Benham, sued Robert de Esnyngton for a toft, four acres of land, and four acres of wood in Esnyngton (Essington), which she claimed as her right and inheritance. Robert did not appear,
and a day had been given to him by his essoign after the first summons. The
Sheriff was therefore ordered to take the tenements claimed, into the King's
hand, and to summon him for the Octaves of St. Hillary. m. 1, dorso.