Staffordshire Historical Collections, Vol. 7, Part 1. Originally published by Staffordshire Record Society, London, 1886.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
Coram Rege Roll. Michaelmas, 32–33 E. I.
Staff. Thomas le Keu of Bromshulf (Bramshall), sued William son of Michael de Morton, Edmund son of William de Morton, Walter de Penne, Hugh de St. George, Adam Paynessone of Preston, and John son of Michael de Morton in a plea of trespass. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to attach them, and he returned they could not be found, and held nothing in the country. He is therefore ordered to arrest them if found, and keep them in safe custody, and produce them at the Octaves of Hillary wherever the King might be within the kingdom. m. 19.
Warw. Whereas Henry de Pynkeny by his deed had conceded to the King the homage and all the service of John de Pynkeny and of his heirs, for a Knight's fee, and for all the lands, etc., which the said John held of the said Henry in Igingtone in co. Warwick, and the homage and service of William de Curly and of his heirs for a Knight's fee, and for all the lands, etc., which the said William held of the said Henry in la Grave in the same county, and likewise all the other fees, if the said Henry held elsewhere in the kingdom, etc., and owing to which the Sheriff had been commanded to distrain the said John and William and others to appear before the King at the Quindene of Easter, to perform the homage due by reason of the said concession, and the Sheriff returned that the said John and William were dead; and upon this, one Philip de Gayton came and said that he held the manor of la Grave, of Theobald de Neville, and not of the King, and he produced a fine dated 13 E. I., between Philip de Gayton and Scholastica his wife, (fn. 1) complainants, and Theobald de Neville, deforciant, of the manor of la Grave, by which the said Theobald acknowledged the said manor to be the right of Philip and Scolastica, to be held by them and their heirs of the said Theobald, rendering a farthing annually for all service, and performing all services due to the capital lords; and the said Theobald further conceded that half of all the lands and tenements which Scolastica formerly wife of William de Curly held in dower of the inheritance of the said Theobald in the vill of Bodebrok, after the death of the said Scolastica, and which after the death of Scolastica should revert to Theobald and his heirs, should remain to the said Philip and Scolastica and the heirs of Philip, etc. And Theobald appeared in Court and stated that the manor of la Grave is half of the said manor of Bodebrok, and which manor he holds in purparty with one John de Hastang of the inheritance of William de Curly; and it was held of the heirs of William de Dodingeseles, and that he and his ancestors had so held it from time out of memory, and he stated that Ida the wife of John de Clinton of Makstoke, and Margaret the wife of John le Grey are the heirs of the said William de Dodingeseles. John de Hastang came and acknowledged he held half the said manor in purparty with Theobald, of the inheritance of the said William de Curly, and that it was held of the said Ida and Margaret. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to distrain the said Ida and Margaret to appear Coram Rege at three weeks from Easter. m. 30.
Staff. The Sheriff was ordered to raise 10 marks from the lands and chattels of Richard de Harle (Harley), lately Sheriff, and which the said Richard, whilst he was Sheriff, had levied from the goods and chattels of William son of William de Alrewich, Ralph de Pipe, and others, and to bring them into Court at this term to pay them to Walter de Strongeford in part payment of £40, the damages he had recovered on occasion of a trespass committed against him by the said William son of William and the others; and the Sheriff was also ordered to raise 10 marks from the goods and chattels of William (sic) Beysyn, lately Sheriff, and which the said William (sic) had levied whilst he was Sheriff from the same William son of William and the others, and which he retained in his own hands. And the Sheriff returned that Richard de Harle held nothing in co. Stafford; and it was shown he held sufficient; and he returned that all the goods and chattels of Walter (sic) Beysin had been taken into the King's hand by other writs of fieri facias for divers debts owing to the King before the receipt of the last writ; and he returned 60s. into Court which he had raised himself from the goods and chattels of the said William son of William, etc.; and he stated that he had taken other goods to the value of 100s., for which he had not yet found purchasers. The Sheriff is therefore ordered as before, to raise 10 marks from the goods and chattels of Richard, and also 10 marks from the goods and chattels of Walter, and pay them into Court on the morrow of the Purification. A postscript shows that no further money had been paid into Court up to Michaelmas, 33–34 E. I. m. 32.
Staff. The Abbot of Deulacres, and Brother Robert de Cundeslegh his fellow monk (comonachus), sued Ralph son of Richard de Bromlegh, John de Bromlegh, William son of William de Bromlegh of Whitemore, and Robert de Hexstall, in a plea of conspiracy and trespass. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce them at the Quindene of Hillary. m. 49.
Staff. William le Barbour of Newcastle-under-Lyme sued Thomas le Scryveyn and John his brother, Andover son of John de Knotton and Thomas his brother, Robert Swetcok, William de Copston and Joan his wife, Thomas de Braddylee, Alice de Knotton, William son of Robert Perot, and four others, for a trespass. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff was ordered to distrain and produce them at the Octaves of Hillary. m. 8, dorso.