Staffordshire Assize Roll
56 Henry III

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

Major-General Hon. George Wrottesley (editor)

Year published

1883

Pages

191-215

Citation Show another format:

'Staffordshire Assize Roll: 56 Henry III', Staffordshire Historical Collections, vol. 4 (1883), pp. 191-215. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52396 Date accessed: 02 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Staffordshire Assize Roll of 56 H. III.

Headed, "Placita de juratis et assisis apud Lichefeld, in Comitatu Stafford, in crastino Sanctæ Trinitatis, coram R. de Hengham et sociis suis Justiciariis, anno regni Regis Henrici, filii Regis Johannis, L. sexto."

Extracts. (fn. 1)

Joan, the widow of Alan de Engelfeud, who brought a writ of dower against John de Engelfeud respecting tenements in Humele (and) Swyndon, withdrew her plea. m. 1.

Margaret, widow (fn. 2) of Richard de Amberton, who brought a writ of mort d'ancestor against Nicholas de Amberton respecting a tenement in Amberton (Amerton), withdrew her plea. m. 1.

John, son of Simon de Herevill (Heronville), who brought a writ of mort d'ancestor against Sibilla, widow of Simon de Hereville, respecting a tenement in Wodnebyri (Wednesbury), withdrew his plea. His pledges were Roger Illary and Nicholas de Bergeveny. m. 1.

The jury on whom William de Parles had put himself, stated that Sampson, son of Sampson the Jew, had sold to Roger de Somery certain debts owing to him by William amounting to 120l., and the King by his writ had ordered the Sheriff to give seisin to Roger or to his messenger of the lands, rents, and services of William pledged for the said debt, and that when the Sheriff had in consequence given seisin to Roger of the manor of Honeswurth, and the chattels within the same manor belonging to William, the said William together with Adam de Pyrie, John, son of William de Parles, and Simon le Vacher, had come by night to the said manor, broken into the park, and carried away 60 head of cattle. William is therefore to be imprisoned, and the Sheriff is ordered to arrest the others. (fn. 3) m. 1.

Thomas, son of John, who brought a writ of entry against Richard, son of Thomas, respecting a tenement in Parva Honne (Onn), withdrew his plea. m. 2.

Juliana, widow of William de Adbaston, sued Adam de Chetewynd for a third of an acre of land in Adbaston as her dower. Adam concedes it. m. 1, dorso.

John de Swyneferton (Swynnerton) appeared and conceded to Hugh de Beumeys and Isolda his wife, a third part of three virgates, and 7s. 6d. of rent in Shelton, Acton, and Chelle, as the dower of Robert de Mere, the first husband of Isolda, and kinsman of the said John, whose heir he is. m. 1, dorso.

The Abbot of Roucestre appeared against Robert de Staundon in a plea that he should hold to a convention made between Robert de Staundon, the father of Robert, whose heir he is, and Philip, formerly Abbot of Roucestre, respecting 22s. and 5d. of rent and a pair of gloves in Waterfall. Robert did not appear, and the Sheriff returned he had no lands in Staffordshire by which he could be distrained, and it was testified he had land in the county of Derby. The Sheriff of Derbyshire is therefore ordered to distrain him, &c., and to produce him at fifteen days from St. John the Baptist. m. 1, dorso.

Ralph de Wasteneys and Beatrice his wife give a mark for license of concord with William de Englefeud and Alice his wife respecting a virgate of land in Acton, and with Adam de Parco and Cecilia his wife respecting two virgates in the same vill. m. 1, dorso.

Nicholas, son of Henry, of Great Sandon, sued Peter le Clerk, of Little Sandon, for a messuage and three bovates of land in Little Staundon (sic), and six other tenants in the same vill for other parcels of land which Richard de Draycote, his grandfather, whose heir he is, was seised as of fee &c., when he died.

The defendants appeared and called to warranty Peter le Clerk, who appeared and warranted their tenements to them. A concord was afterwards made, by which Nicholas remitted his claim for 40s. m. 1, dorso.

John de Elkesdon, Simon de Clifton and Elena his wife, Hawys Putrel, Christiana de Elkesdon, and Agnes Basset, sued the Prior of Trentham for the manor of Elkesdon. They afterwards withdrew their plea. m. 2.

Robert, son of John de Edmundeston, and Isabella his wife, who brought an assize of novel disseisin against Robert de Grendon and others respecting common of pasture in Mulewych, withdrew their plea. m. 2.

An assize, &c., if Richard de Onne had unjustly disseised Henry de Brumle of common of pasture in Onne. Henry complaining that whereas he used to common in a certain road of pasture with all kinds of cattle in the open season, the said Richard had built a house so that he could no longer common there.

Richard stated that Felicia and Eva, two sisters and coparceners, had divided a certain inheritance, and the place in dispute had been assigned to Felicia as part of her purparty on which to build a house, Eva having inherited the capital messuage, and Felicia had afterwards assigned it to him. The jury find in his favour. m. 2.

Ughtred, son of William, who brought a writ of mort d'ancestor against Peter Giffard respecting four acres in Chilinton, withdrew his plea. m. 2, dorso.

Juliana, the widow of William de Adbaston, sued William le Forester and six other tenants in Adbaston, for a third of their tenements, as her dower. The defendants appeared and conceded her claim. m. 3.

An assize, &c., if Richard de Aston, father of Richard, son of Julia, was seised, &c., when he died of two parts of half a virgate of land in Aston, which John, son of Geoffrey de Aston, holds; who appeared and called to warranty the Abbot of Combermere, who came and warranted the land to him. The jury state that Richard de Aston died seised of the tenement in question, and Richard is his next heir. The Abbot is therefore in misericordiâ, and John, son of Geoffrey, to receive from the Abbot land of equal value in exchange; and because the said Richard, father of Richard, held the tenement of the Abbot, the damages are taxed at 10 marks. m. 3.

An assize, &c., if Thomas de Halewton, Richard le Forester, and John le Venur, had unjustly disseised Robert de Weston of common of pasture in La Leye, belonging to his free tenement in the same vill. Robert withdrew his plea. m. 3.

An assize, &c., if Philip de Mutton, William Brun, and Richard, son of Sarra, had unjustly disseised Henry de Bromleg of his free tenement in Abbeton, viz., of one-third of four acres.

Philip answered for all, and stated that Henry never had seisin of the land. The jury find in his favour. m. 3.

An assize, &c., if Alice de Burford, mother of Robert de Ferrars, of Mere, was seised, &c., when she died of one-fourth of a Knight's fee excepting one messuage in Mere (Maer), and of one-fourth of the advowson of the Church of the same vill, which Thomas, son of Thomas de Dutton, holds; who appeared and called to warranty Philippa de Dutton, who came and warranted the same to him, and stated that the said Robert, in the year 39 H. III., had brought a similar assize respecting the same tenement against Thomas the Parson of the Church of Staundon, (fn. 4) and the said Thomas had called to warranty Thomas de Dutton, formerly her husband, and herself, who had warranted the tenement to him; and a concord had been made, and a fine levied between them, in which it was contained that the said Robert remitted and quit-claimed to the said Thomas de Dutton and Philippa, and their heirs, all his right in the said tenement, and she produced the fine.

Robert stated the fine should not prejudice him, because at the time it was levied he was under age, and had never appeared in Court, and the said Thomas de Dutton and Philippa, knowing he was under age, had procured a stranger to appear in Court for him, and he prayed that this might be verified. Robert afterwards withdrew his suit, and he and his pledges are in misericordiâ. m. 3, dorso.

An assize, &c., if John de Somervile had unjustly disseised Alice, daughter of Geoffrey le Whyte, of a messuage and half a virgate of land in Alrewas. John pleaded that Alrewas was of the ancient demesne of the King, in which no writ ran except the King's close writ. The suit is dismissed. m. 4.

Philip, son of Philip le Simple, sued Richard, son of Richard de Adynbrok, for seven acres in Rouley, which the said Philip had demised to him whilst he was under age. Richard stated that Philip had never demised the land to him; that as regards one-half of it he had entered through one Philip, son of William, son of Ralph, and as regarded the other half, he had recovered it against the said Philip le Simple, the father of Philip, in the Court of Ruleye (Rowley Regis). The jury say that Richard entered into one-fourth of the tenement by the said Philip, and he recovers seisin of that part, and is in misericordiâ for a false claim as regarded the rest of the tenement. m. 4.

Magister John Giffard was sued by William de Onecote, to permit him to have his reasonable estover in John's wood of Pitlesle, and which had been possessed by his ancestor William in the reign of the present King; and from William the right descended to Henry his son and heir, and from Henry, who died without issue, to William, who now sues as his brother and heir. A concord was made, by which John Giffard conceded to William and his heirs reasonable estover in the said wood, both of the dead wood and of the green wood by view of the Forester. m. 5.

Bertram de Burgo gives half a mark for license of concord with Richard de Boreweston (Burston) and Roys his wife in a plea of convention. (fn. 5) m. 5.

An assize, &c., if John, the son of Peter Giffert, of Chilynton, and Richard le Provost, had unjustly disseised Richard, son of Richard de Huntinbach, of common of pasture in two acres in Waleton, belonging to his free tenement of Huntinbach. John appeared, and stated he had not disseised Richard of any common of pasture, because his brother, William Giffard, had held a several pasture there, and that after the death of the said William, John had entered into the same pasture as his brother and heir. The jury find in favour of Richard. m. 6.

An assize, &c., if Alice de Barre, the mother of Alice, the wife of Bartholomew de Swinnerton, was seised as of fee, &c., of a messuage and a carucate of land, and five acres of pasture, and two acres of wood, and 3s. of rent in Little Barre when she died, which land, &c., William, son of Roger Illari, and Felicia his mother hold. Felicia stated she claimed nothing in the land except by way of dower, and she called William, son of Roger, to warranty, who appeared and warranted the dower to her, and stated that the said Alice had never died seised of the pasture in fee, because Philip de Rouleghe (Rowley), formerly husband of the said Alice, long before his death had enfeoffed the said Roger Illari by his charter, which he produced; and as regards the residue of the land, &c., he stated that the tenements formerly belonged to Richard de Rowellee, who died seised of them, and after his death the said Philip de Rowellee, who had married the said Alice, had entered into them as his son and heir.

Bartholomew and Alice admitted the tenements belonged formerly to the said Philip, but stated that Philip had enfeoffed William le Rus of Walleshale of them by his charter which they produced, and William le Rus was in good seisin of them for a year, and had afterwards given them to the said Philip de Rowelle in frank marriage with Alice, the daughter of Adam de Colewich, and after the death of the said Philip, the said Alice, the wife of Philip and mother of the said Alice, held the tenements as her maritagium, and had died seised of them. The jury say that the said Alice did not die seised of the tenements in question, because Philip de Rowelee long before the death of Alice had enfeoffed the said Roger Hillari of the pasture and the rent, and the other part of the tenement was the right and fee of the said Philip of the inheritance of Richard his father. Bartholomew and Alice are therefore in misericordiâ for a false claim.

Bartholomew and Alice afterwards gave half a mark for another jury of twenty-four to convict the first jury of a false judgment. m. 6.

An assize, &c., if John de Litlebiri, Hervey Russel, Richard, son of Hervey, and Alexander Smalris, had unjustly disseised John de Smalris of common of pasture in seven acres of pasture in Sondon which pertained to his free tenements in Smalris. John came and answered for all, and stated that William Trumwyne, Richard le Botiller, and himself, hold the vill of Sondon, as a single heir of William Maubank, and the said John Smalris is the liegeman and tenant of William Trumwyne his co-parcener, and that even if they had approved the waste of the said vill (fn. 6) that John Smalris had as much common of pasture as belonged to his tenement in the said vill, and free entry and exit, and upon this he appealed to a jury.

John admitted he was the liegeman of the said William Trumwyne, but stated he had not sufficient pasture for the tenement he held.

The jury say that John Smalris had sufficient pasture, but that John de Litlebiri and others not named in the writ had obstructed his way to it. m. 6.

Alice, the daughter of William de Wrottesle, who brought a jury of twenty-four to convict twelve (of a false judgment) in a plea of novel disseisin against Hugh de Wrottesle and others named in the writ, respecting land in Wrottesle, appeared and withdrew her plea. Therefore she and her sureties for the prosecution are in misericordiâ, viz., Robert de Haggele and Thomas de la Pole of Lutileg. m. 6.

Ralph de Cotes, who brought a jury of twenty-four to convict twelve in a plea of mort d'ancestor versus Lettice de Cotes, respecting thirteen and a half acres, &c., in Cotes, did not appear to prosecute. He is therefore to be arrested, and his sureties are in misericordiâ, viz., Gilbert de Haytele and Adam de Halewehull. m. 6.

Thomas de Renes by his charter remitted and quit-claimed to Nicholas, son of Robert de Stafford, all his right in sixty acres in La Hide, and conceded that if the said Nicholas or his heirs should be impleaded for them by the heirs of Simon Borard, or by the heirs of the said Thomas, the said Thomas conceded that his lands in Clyfton, in co. Bucks, should be held as warranty to the said Nicholas and his heirs and assigns against the said heirs of Thomas. m. 7.

William de Cavereswell acknowledged he owed to Thomas de Reynes, by the pledge of Nicholas, son of Robert de Stafford, 20 marks. m. 7.

Nicholas, son of Robert de Stafford, acknowledged he had conveyed and conceded to Sir William de Cauvereswell, for 12 marks received, all his demesne in the vill of Bradeleg, until such time as the said 12 marks shall be repaid, the profits of the said lands to be allocated in the meantime to repay the money. m. 7.

Nicholas, son of Robert de Wireleg, who is said to be of full age, sued Magister Michael le Teynterer, of Lichfield, for a messuage and a virgate of land in Alresae, which he had demised to him whilst he was under age. Michael stated he entered into the tenement by one Christiana del Wal, whose right and maritagium the land had been, and he produced a charter of the said Christiana. The jury say that the said Christiana had impleaded the said Nicholas in banco when Nicholas was only sixteen years of age, and at that time Michael had persuaded Nicholas to give up the land to the said Christiana in order that she might enfeoff the said Michael of it. Nicholas is therefore to recover seisin. m. 7, dorso.

John de Wauton appeared against Robert de Fereres, Earl of Derby, in a plea that he should warrant to him one hundred and twenty acres of land in Donestal (Dunstall) which he claimed to hold of him; and he did not appear, and the Sheriff had not summoned him. The Sheriff is therefore commanded to summon him to be at Westminster on the morrow of All Souls. m. 7, dorso.

Stephen de Saut sued Henry de Heneston (Enson) for a messuage and half a virgate of land in Saut, in which he had no entry except by Robert de Saut, his grandfather, whose heir he is, and who had demised the tenement to one Matilda de Saut for a term now expired.

Henry appeared, and called to warranty Richard, son of Lettice de Rowelawe, who came and warranted the tenement to him, and stated he entered by Roger, the brother of the said Robert. A concord was afterwards made. m. 7, dorso.

Joan, widow of Alan de Engelfeld, sued John de Engelfeld to render to her a third of three messuages, a virgate and a noke of land in Humele (Himley), and a third of thirteen messuages and six and a half virgates of land in Wyndon (Swindon), and a third of 15s. 4d. of rent in Ambaby, as her dower. John did not appear, and had previously made default, and the Sheriff had been commanded to take the said third parts into the King's hands, and to summon the said John to be at Lichfield at fifteen days from Trinity, and he did not appear. Joan is therefore to recover seisin of the dower claimed by default. m. 7, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Thomas de Hamstide, father of Thomas, son of Thomas de Hamstide, was seised in his demesne, &c., of 3s. rent in Homerwych when he died, and of which Robert Russel had deforced him; Robert called Richard fitz Wydo to warranty, who came and warranted the rent to him. The jury find in favour of Thomas, and Richard is to compensate Robert from other tenements. m. 8.

William Wyther and Orabil his wife, custodians of the lands of Richard, son of Richard de Draycote, were sued by Thomas de St. Vigore and Matilda his wife, for a third of two carucates of land and fifteen bovates of land and 32 marks of rent in Tylington, which Thomas and Matilda claimed as the dower of Matilda. Thomas and Matilda did not appear to prosecute, and as they were the plaintiffs, the suit is dismissed. m. 8.

An assize, &c., if Robert de Brineton, Roger Bagot of Bruneton, Roger Bagot, of Blymunhull, Richard de Picheford, and two others, had unjustly disseised Richard de Okovere and Beatrice his wife of an acre of land in Bruneton (Brinton). Richard and Beatrice withdraw their plea. m. 8.

An assize, &c., if Robert, son of Robert, brother of Thomas de Mulewyz, was seised, &c., of a messuage and six acres of land in Mulewyz and Cotes, near Mulewyz, when he died, which William de Cavereswell holds; who came and stated that the said Robert did not die seised of the tenement, because long before his death he had enfeoffed one Robert le Waleys of it by a charter which he produced, and Robert le Waleys had enfeoffed him of the same by another charter which he produced.

Verdict for William de Caverswall. m. 8, dorso.

An assize, &c., if James de Aldithelegh had unjustly disseised Adam de Werynton of two parts of a burgage and four acres of land in the vill of Newcastle-under-Lyme. James appeared by his bailiff, Walter de Henle, who stated that James had been enfeoffed of the four acres by one Roger Brid, and if any disseisin of Adam had taken place, it had been done by Roger, and not by James de Audley; and as regards the two parts of the burgage, the King after the battle of Evesham had given to the said James all the lands and tenements of the said Adam, who had been against the King during the war, and Adam had made a fine with James for 20 marks, of which he had paid 15 marks, and for the residue had released to the said James his claim to the two parts of the burgage. Verdict for James de Audley. m. 8, dorso.

Adam, son of Thomas Gilbert, sued William, son of Robert de Bruges, for a messuage in Stafford, of which one Wymer his ancestor had been enfeoffed in the time of King Henry, the grandfather of the present King, and from Wymer the right descended to one Gilbert, his son and heir, and from Gilbert to one Bonamy, as son and heir, and from Bonamy, who died without issue, to Thomas, his brother and heir, and from Thomas to one Hugh as his son and heir, and from Hugh, who died without issue, to Adam, who now sues William appeared and admitted the seisin of Wymer the ancestor, but stated that Wymer had enfeoffed William his son of the tenement, who had died seised of it, and from William the right descended to Adam, his son and heir, and Adam whilst in good seisin of it had enfeoffed one Edelina, and Edelina had enfeoffed William, son of Robert. The jury find in favour of William. m. 9.

William, son of Roger de Bydulf, sued Richard Godwyne for half a burgage in Newcastle-under-Lyme. Richard pleaded that when the writ was issued the tenement was held by his daughter Beatrice, and the jury find in his favour. m. 9.

Walter, the son of John Akard, sued Roger de Rydeware for seven acres of pasture in Draycote, of which Robert, son of Everard his kinsman, whose heir he is, was seised, &c., when he died. Roger appeared and called to warranty the Prior of Toteburi, who came on the summons and asked why he ought to warrant the tenement to him. Roger stated that he held the said pasture as part of six other acres of pasture in the same vill, of the Prior by homage and the service of half a mark per annum. The Prior denied that the seven acres in question formed a portion of the land held of him, and produced a charter of Walter de Rideware the father of Roger, which testified he held of the Prior six acres of pasture by the service of half a mark yearly.

Roger stated a certain Nicholas, Prior of Totebiri, the predecessor of the Prior, had enfeoffed Walter his father and Matilda his mother conjointly of the said seven acres, as well as the six acres of pasture. The jury find that the Prior was not bound to warrant the seven acres, and find in favour of Walter, son of John. m. 10.

Hugh Maunsel sued the Prior of La Launde for the advowson of the Church of Pateleshull, of which one Maunsel his ancestor was seised as of fee in the time of King John, the father of the present King, and had presented Laurence his Clerk, who had been admitted and instituted on his presentation, and from the said Maunsel the right descended to one Robert, his son and heir, and from Robert to Hugh, who now sues as his son and heir; and he put himself on the Great Assize of the Lord the King; and William de Caverswell, William de Haundesacre, John de Somerville, and Peter le Tok, four Knights, came and elected these (sic) (no knights named). A concord was afterwards made. (fn. 7) m. 10, dorso.

William Bagot was summoned by Robert de Kingeslee and Alice his wife, Robert de Beyvill and Alienora his wife, and Margaret, Sibilla, and Isolda, the sisters of Alienora, in a plea that he should warrant to them a virgate of land in Hilderston, inasmuch as one William de Hildeston had brought an assize of novel disseisin against them, conjointly with William Bagot, respecting the said tenement, of which the said William Bagot had enfeoffed Nicholas de Bormeston, the father of the said Margaret, and her sisters, whose heirs they are, and had bound himself to warrant it to him; and William de Hilderston having recovered the tenement by the said assize, they now brought a writ of warrantia chartæ against the said William Bagot, and claimed compensation from him. William Bagot appeared and acknowledged his charter, and as he stated nothing against the claim, they are to have seisin accordingly. m. 10, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Robert de Grendon, John his son, Henry de Hegestall, and seven others named, had unjustly disseised Robert, son of John de Admundeston, and Isabell his wife, of common of pasture in forty acres in Melewych. Robert appeared and answered for all, and stated Robert and Isabella only held three acres of land in the vill, and they were of his fee, and they had sufficient pasturage for that tenement. The jury find in his favour. m. 10, dorso.

John de Elkesdon, Simon de Clyfton and Elena his wife, Hawise Poutrel, Christiana de Elkesdon, and Agnes Basset, sue the Prior of Trentham for the manor of Over Elkesdone, excepting four messuages and sixty acres of land, sixty acres of park, sixty acres of pasture, one hundred acres of wood, and a mill, which they claim as the inheritance of the said John, Ellen, Hawise, Christiana, and Agnes, and of which Adam their ancestor was seised as of fee, &c., in the reign of the present King; and from Adam, who died without issue, the right descended to Thomas his brother and heir, and from Thomas, who died without issue, the right descended to Hawise, Christiana, and Agnes, who now sue, and to Eva, Margaret, Dionisia, and Matilda, as his sisters and heirs, and from Eva and Margaret, who died without issue, the right of their purparty descended to Ellen and the others as their sisters and heirs, and from Dionisia the right of her purparty descended to John, who now sues as her son and heir, and from Matilda the right of her purparty descended to Ellen, who now sues as her daughter and heir.

The Prior called to warranty Geoffrey Griffyn, who appeared and asked why he should be called to warranty, and the Prior proffered a charter of Geoffrey Griffyn, the father of Geoffrey, which testified he had given the said manor to the Church of Trentham, for the good of his soul. (fn. 8) He also proffered letters-patent of the same Geoffrey constituting Ralph Brito his nephew his proctor, to give seisin of the manor to the said Prior, because he (Geoffrey) was living in co. Salop. And Geoffrey pleaded the said charter should not prejudice him, because at the time it was made Geoffrey his father was non compos mentis suæ, and he appealed to a jury. As the charter was made in co. Salop, a jury from that county was summoned, who stated that Geoffrey the father was of sound mind when he executed the deed. It is therefore considered that Geoffrey should warrant the manor to the Prior. m. 11.

An assize, &c., if Geoffrey, the son of Bertram Griffyn of Cleyton, had disseised the Master of the Knights Templars in England of common of pasturage in Cleydon, which pertained to the free tenement of the Templars in Kel. The jury say that the Master of the Templars is in seisin of the common of pasture claimed. He is therefore in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 11.

The same jury found that the Master of the Templars had unjustly prostrated a fence which had been raised by Geoffrey to protect his corn from the cattle of the Templars, and give him 60s. as damages. m. 11.

Alice, the widow of Hugh de Boeles, sued William Hillary for two messuages and a virgate of land in Ruschale, in which he had no entry except through one Richard le Mareschall, to whom William de Rushale her grandfather, whose heir she is, had demised it for a term now expired. William appeared and stated he did not enter through the said Richard, but through his father Richard, who had died seised of the land. Alice could not deny this, and had permission to withdraw her plea. m. 11, dorso.

Thomas de Mere sued John de Baskervile for a messuage and forty acres in Aston, in which the said John had no entry except by a demise made by Thomas to one Roger Orawe, whilst he was in the prison of the said Roger. The Bailiff of John appeared for him, and proffered the King's letters of protection for the said John whilst he was in Ireland on the business of the Lord Edward (the King's son). The suit therefore remanet. m. 11, dorso.

Robert de Somerford, who brought a writ against Thomas Pany and Alice his wife respecting common of pasture in Covene, withdrew his plea. m. 12.

Thomas, son of John de Engleton, sued Richard, son of Thomas de Onne, for a noke of land in Little Onne, in which Richard had no entry except through Felicia de Onne, the grandmother of the said Thomas, whose heir he is, and who had demised it to him for a term of ten years now expired. Richard stated he entered into the land through Felicia and her husband William in fee, and not for a term. Thomas afterwards withdrew the writ. m. 12, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Richard le Botiller, William Trumwyne, John de Littelburi, and eleven others (fn. 9) named, had disseised Roger de Mercinton and Alienora his wife of common of pasture in Sondon (Sandon), pertaining to their free tenement in Gayton. Richard and the others deny that Roger and Alienora had any right to common of pasture in Sandon, but the jury find that they had been disseised of common of pasture in twenty acres. m. 12, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Hawyse, daughter of Robert de Benhale, the aunt of Alice, daughter of John de Benhale, was seised as of fee, &c., of half a messuage and twenty acres of land in Fulford, when she died, which William de Caverswell holds. William appeared and stated that Hawyse did not die seised of the land in fee, and that one Adam de Fuleford, whose tenement it was, had enfeoffed Nicholas, son of William de Draycote, the husband of Hawyse, severally in it, and that Hawyse had no claim except as wife of Nicholas; and it was stated that Edith, the sister of Hawyse, who had been summoned to sue for her purparty, did not appear. The jury find in favour of William de Caverswall. m. 12, dorso.

An assize, &c., if William Shine, the father of William Shine of Whiston, was seised as of fee, &c., of three acres and a rood of land in Bromhale when he died, which William de Drayton and Margaret his wife hold, who appeared and called to warranty Richard, son of Robert de Horsebroke, who appeared and warranted the land to them, and stated that William never died seised as of fee of the land, because it was formerly in the possession of one Ralph de Bromhale, who gave it to William Shine, the father of William, in frank marriage with Petronilla his sister; and after the death of William Petronilla held the tenement and enfeoffed in it the said Richard son of Robert, by a charter which he produced. The jury find in favour of the warrantor, Richard, son of Robert. m. 12, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Nicholas de Ambrighton and Walter the Clerk had disseised Margaret, the daughter of Richard de Ambrighton, of her free tenement in Ambrigston (Amerton) and Bolde, viz., of four bovates of land and five acres of pasture in Ambrigston, and of half the manor of Bolde.

The jury say that Richard de Ambrighton, the father of Margaret, died on a certain Tuesday, and that the Bailiffs of Hamon I'Estraunge of Certeleg, on hearing of the death of Richard, who held his tenements of the said Hamon, took possession of the tenements and of the said Margaret, whom they found with the dead body of the said Richard, and took her to Hamon's castle of Certeleg. (fn. 10) And the said Nicholas de Ambrighston, the brother of the said Richard, on the Wednesday, viz., on the morrow of the day that Richard died, went to the said Hamon, who was then acting (agentum) in co. Salop, and gave him to understand that he was the next heir of Richard; and upon that Hamon had given him letters to his Bailiffs to put him in seisin of the lands of Richard without delay; and they state that the Bailiffs had taken possession of the land to the use of the said Margaret, who was then under age, and the custody of whose lands and marriage belonged to the said Hamon, her lord. The jury on being further questioned state they believed that Margaret was born before her father had married her mother, and that she was therefore a bastard, and they know of no other heir except the said Nicholas, who was the legitimate brother of Richard. A day was given to the parties coram Rege at fifteen days from Michaelmas. m. 12, dorso.

Roger, the Bishop of Coventry and Lichefeld, was summoned to answer a plea of the Abbot of Hales, that he should permit him to present a fit Parson to the Church of Horeburne which was vacant, and the advowson of which belongs to him, inasmuch as one Warine fitz Gerard, the Lord of Horeburne and the Patron of the Church, had presented in the present reign Nicholas his Clerk, who had been instituted and died Parson of the Church; and from the said Warine the right of advowson descended to Margaret his daughter and heir, who had enfeoffed the said Abbot both of the manor and the advowson. The Bishop appeared and stated he ought not to be required to answer to the writ, because the Church was not vacant, inasmuch as one Henry de Gavio held it by the collation of Roger his predecessor, the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. m. 13, dorso.

William, son of Agnes de Walton, William de Soggenhull and Alice his wife, and Thomas de Coten, sued Magister John Giffard for half a virgate of land in Walton, of which Alice, daughter of Dese of Walton, the kinsman of William, Alice, and Thomas, whose heirs they are, was seised, &c., when she died. Magister John denied that Alice had died seised of the land as of fee, and stated that Alice had formerly impleaded Peter Giffard his father for the same land, and it had then been agreed that Alice should hold it for her life only, and he produced a deed to that effect. A concord was afterwards made. m. 14, dorso.

Benedict de Boterdon sued Robert Saucheverel of Quikeshull for three messuages and six bovates of land in Quikeshull, of which a certain Dunnig his ancestor had been seised, &c., in the time of King Henry the grandfather of the present King, and from Dunnig the right descended to Edith his daughter and heir, and from Edith to another Edith as daughter and heir, and from the said Edith to one William as son and heir, and from William to another William as son and heir, and from the last William to Benedict, who now sues as son and heir. Robert defended his right, and stated that the said Edith, daughter of Edith, had a son Adam, who is not named in the descent, and that the said Adam was born before the William named. A concord was afterwards made. m. 15.

Richard de Okovere gives half a mark for license of concord with Robert de Okovere, in a plea that the said Robert should acquit him of the service which John de Verdon claimed for the tenement which he holds of the said Robert in Shone (Shene), and in which Robert is medius between them and ought to acquit him. (fn. 11) m. 15.

Margery, daughter of Christiana de Weford, and Agnes her sister, sue William de Oddingesheles and Geoffrey Henry for a messuage and half a virgate of land in Weford. William stated that the land in question is of the inheritance of Joan his wife, who was not named in the writ, and the suit is dismissed. m. 15.

Simon de Neville of Cotes sued Walter, Abbot of Deulacresse, for a yearly rent of 100s., owing for two hundred acres of land in Chartelegh, which he had demised to Ralph, formerly Abbot of Deulacresse, for a term of fifteen years, and which rent the Abbot had detained for six years past. The Abbot stated that the said Simon was against the King in the late war, and the King had given all his lands and tenements to Hamon l'Estraunge, and the said Hamon was still in seisin of them. The suit was dismissed—Simon to pursue his claim before the Justices assigned to hear pleas respecting lands given away on account of the war. m. 15, dorso.

John de Elkesdone, Simon de Clifton, and Elena his wife, Hawise Poutrel Christiana de Elkesdone, and Agnes Basset, sue the Prior of Trentham for the manor of Over Elkesdone, &c., (as before).

The Prior called to warranty Geoffrey Griffin, who appeared and warranted the land to him, and put himself on the Great Assize; and John de Somerville, Henry de Semmor (St. Maur), Peter Thok, William de Handesacre, four Knights, came and elected these, viz., William de Caverswell, William Wyther, William de Chetelton, Philip de Dreycote, Robert de Melburn, Robert de Herthull, John Touchet, and Hugh de Meynil, who returned a verdict in favour of John and the other coparceners. It is therefore considered that they should recover seisin, and Geoffrey Griffin should make compensation to the Prior out of other land to the same value. m. 15 b.

Matilda, the widow of William Wymer, sued Richard Wymer of Morton for one-third of a messuage and two virgates of land in Bromlegh as her dower. Richard appeared and conceded her claim. m. 15 b, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Henry de Pyrie had unjustly raised a fence in Pyrie to the injury of the free tenement of Guy de Barre in Little Barra: Guy complaining he could no longer drive his cattle to his pasture in Pyrie. The jury find in favour of Guy, and the fence is to be prostrated at the cost of Henry de Pyrie. m. 15 b, dorso.

John fitz Alan of Tyrne sued Richard Bagot for 4s. rent in Falverlegh, in which Richard had no entry except through John Bagot, who had unjustly disseised Emma Bagot, the mother of John (fitz Alan), whose heir he is. Richard stated that Emma never was seised of the rent as of fee, and John withdrew his claim. m. 16.

William, son of Agnes de Waleton, William de Suggenhulle and Alicia his wife, Thomas, son of Isabella of Walton, remit and quit-claim to Magister John Giffard, the Lord of Waleton, all their right to half a virgate of land in Waleton which Alice, daughter of Dese, formerly held. m. 16.

An assize if Henry de Verdon, the father of Henry de Verdon, was seised, &c., of 62s. rent in Bockenhale (Bucknall) and Bidulf when he died, &c., which John de Verdon holds. John appeared and conceded that Henry the father had died seised of the rent, and that Henry is his next heir, and stated he claimed nothing beyond the custody of the tenement until the full age of Henry, inasmuch as the said Henry the father had held the tenement of him (sic, left unfinished). m. 16.

John de Somervile is in misericordiâ, and is fined 10l.

Philip de Chetwynd is in misericordiâ, and is fined 10l.

Nicholas de Overton and Agnes his wife sue William de Evenewyk, the Master of the Hospital of St. John of Lichfield, and the brothers of the said House, for a virgate of land in Stychebroke, excepting eight acres; and they sue Henry, son of William de Helmehurst, and two other tenants named, for six acres in the same vill, of which one Walter, the ancestor of Agnes, was seised, &c., and from Walter the right descended to another Walter as his son and heir, and from Walter, who died without issue, to Agnes his sister and heir. The defendants appeared and appealed to a Great Assize, and John de Somervile, Richard de Loges, John Tochet, and Henry de Seymmor, four Knights, came and elected the following, viz., William de Caverswell, William Wyther, William de Chetelton, William de Hondesacre, Peter de Tok, Philip de Dreycote, Robert de Melburn, Robert de Herthull, Hugh de Meynil, and Robert de Staundon, who appeared and returned a verdict for the Master and Knights of St. John.

And the said Henry, son of William de Helmehurst, called to warranty Henry, son of Thomas Burchard, who is within age, and he produced a charter of the said Thomas granting to him the tenement in dispute. The suit to remain till full age of the said Henry, son of Thomas. m. 17.

Thomas, son of Hugh le Franceys of Amelecote, sued Ingeran, son of Laurence of Amelecote, for a messuage and two acres and a half of land in Amelecote (Amblecote), in which the said Ingeran had no entry except by a disseisin which Laurence de Amelecote had unjustly made of John le Fevre of Amelecote, the grandfather of Thomas, whose heir he is.

Ingeran appeared and called to warranty William de Stafford, who came and warranted the tenement to him, and stated that Laurence had never disseised John le Fevre, the grandfather, and that the said John le Fevre, who formerly held the tenement of Cecilia de Stafford, appeared in full Court of the said Cecilia (fn. 12) and surrendered the tenement, and Cecilia had enfeoffed the said Laurence. The jury state that Laurence had unjustly disseised the said John le Fevre, the grandfather of Thomas, and it is therefore considered that Thomas should recover seisin, and William de Stafford should make to Ingeran an exchange of equal value. m. 17.

An assize, &c., if Michael de Trescote, the uncle of Alice, the daughter of Julia de Trescote, was seised, &c., of a messuage and half a virgate of land in Trescote when he died, &c., which William de Overton and Joan his wife now hold; who appeared and called to warranty William de Pereton, who came and warranted the tenement to them, and stated that Michael had not died seised of it, for long before his death he had enfeoffed him (William de Perton) of the tenement, and he produced a charter of Michael to that effect. Verdict for William de Perton. m. 17, dorso.

Richard de Shyreford sued John de Verdun for a messuage and two carucates of land, a mill, fifteen acres of pasture, fifteen acres of wood, and 30s. of rent in Athelaxton (Ellastone), of which one Thomas, his ancestor, had been seised as of fee, &c., in the reign of the present King, and from the said Thomas the right descended to one Robert, as his son and heir, and from the said Robert, who died without issue, to Ralph his brother, and from Ralph, who died without issue, to Richard, who now sues (parentage not named).

John appeared and defended his right, and admitted the seisin of Thomas the ancestor, but stated that the said Thomas had a brother Hugh de Shireford, who after the death of the said Thomas had sued him (John) by writ of mort d'ancestor before Giles de Erdington, the Justice assigned to hear the cause, for a part of the said tenement, and he had sued Henry de Sautcheverel for the other portion by the same assize, and had recovered the said tenements in the said Court, and after Hugh had thus recovered the tenements and was in full seisin of them, he had enfeoffed Adam de Chetewynd of them, and the said Adam being in good seisin of them had enfeoffed him (John de Verdon), and he appealed to a Great Assize; and William de Caverswell, William Bagot, William Wyther, and John Tuschet, four Knights, came and elected the following, viz., Hugh de Meynel, Richard de Stratton, William de Handesacre, Robert de Meleburne, John de Somervile, Henry de Seynmor, Peter de Tok, Gilbert Fraunceis, William de Chetelton, and Philip de Draycote. Verdict for John de Verdon. m. 18.

Matilda, the widow of William Wymer, sued William Bagot, of Brumleg, for one-third of a rent of 2 marks in Brumleg as her dower. William called to warranty Richard Wymer, who appeared and warranted the rent to him, and admitted the claim to dower. William therefore to hold the rent in peace, and the said Matilda to be compensated out of the land of Richard to the same value. m. 18, dorso.

M. 19. "Placita apud Wulfrenehampton die Sancti Jacobi Apostolici."

A jury, &c., to make recognition if a mill and eight acres of land and 8s. 5d. rent in Wolfrenhampton, Honeswurth, Waure, and Codeshale were free alms pertaining to the Church of the Dean and Chapter of Wulfrenehampton, or the lay fee of Nicholas de Oke (Oaken), Henry, son of Clement of Wulfrenehampton, and Margery, daughter of William de Parles. The jury find in favour of the Dean and Chapter. m. 19.

M. 19b. "Placita apud Stafford."

An assize, &c., if John fitz Philip of Berliston, John Baymon, Thomas de Mere, William de Blorton, Bertram Corbet, and nine others named, had unjustly disseised Thomas de Badeleye of common of pasture in sixty acres in Berliston (Barlaston) and Birchull, where he used to common with all kinds of cattle all the year, excepting swine and goats for six weeks in time of pesson, (fn. 13) viz., from the Feast of St. Michael to the Feast of St. Martin.

John fitz Philip answered for all the defendants, and stated that Thomas had sufficient pasture for his tenement in the said vills. Thomas replied he had been disseised of common of pasture, inasmuch as John fitz Philip, the father of the said John, whose heir he is, had conceded him pasture in a certain Haye. Thomas afterwards withdrew his writ. m. 19 b.

An assize, &c., if Walter de Rideware, the father of William de Rideware, was seised, &c., of thirteen acres of pasture in Draycote near Hambury when he died, of which Roger de Rideware holds six acres, and Walter Akart of Foston holds seven acres.

The jury say that Walter died seised of the seven acres held by Walter Akart, and William therefore recovers seisin of them. As regards the six acres claimed, Roger de Rideware called to warranty the Prior of Tuttebiri, and the Prior appeared and asked that it might be tried whether he ought to warrant the land to him, because after the death of Walter de Rideware his father, Roger had entered into the said land, and as the Prior was the capital lord of the fee, he had come to him and performed homage, and he was therefore in seisin only of the homage of Roger and the service for the land, which was half a mark.

And the Prior acknowledged that the said Walter had held the land of him, and he accepted the homage of the said Roger for it, because he was ignorant at that time that there was a nearer heir of Walter, and that William was the eldest son of Walter, and born before Roger. It is considered that the Prior should be dismissed from the suit, and the assize should proceed without him. A concord was afterwards made, by which Roger acknowledged the right of William de Rideware, and for this acknowledgment William granted the tenement to Roger and his heirs for a rent of half a mark yearly, and Roger gave to William 40s. m. 19 b, dorso.

William, son of Walter de Overton, was sued by Henry de Verdon and Felicia his wife for suit and service owing for a free tenement which he holds of them in Womburne. A concord was made by which William acknowledged the tenement to be the right of Henry and Felicia, to be held of them by the service of 6 marks. m. 19 b, dorso.

An assize, &c., if John de Mutton, the father of Eudo de Mutton, was seised, &c., of 4s. of rent in Crokesdene when he died, which rent the Abbot of Crokesdene holds. The Abbot stated that at the time the writ was sued out he did not hold the rent in question, viz., on the 12th July in this year, but that Philip de Chetewynd and Isabella his wife held it. The jury find in favour of the Abbot. m. 20.

Sibilla, the widow of Thomas de Tresel, who brought a writ of novel disseisin against John de Tresel and Peter, son of Nicholas, respecting a tenement in Tresel and Seisdon, withdrew her writ. There were no pledges for the prosecution because she was poor. m. 20.

Thomas, son of Robert de Melewyz, was sued by Henry, son of Jordan de Hegstall, to permit him common of pasture in Melewyz (Millwich), of which Robert de Melewyz, the father of Thomas, whose heir he is, had unjustly disseised his father Jordan, viz., common in twenty acres of pasture in the said vill for all the year and for all kinds of cattle.

Thomas stated that he only held fifteen acres of the twenty acres in question, and he admitted that the said Jordan formerly commoned in them, but it was agreed between Robert de Melewyz his father and the said Jordan, father of Henry, who at that time commoned together with their men in all the common of pasture of the said vill, that the said Henry (sic) de Hegstall should approve for himself a certain portion, viz., forty acres of the common of pasture for himself and his men, and the said Robert de Melewyz, with the assent of the said Jordan, approved for himself another forty acres. Henry denied that his father had ever approved any of the pasture, and stated his father had always commoned in the pasture in question until the said Robert father of Thomas had disseised the said Jordan of it. A jury was summoned to be at Salop on the morrow of All Souls. A postscript states that the jury found that Robert, father of the said Thomas, had not disseised Jordan the father of Henry, because the said Robert, with the assent of Jordan, had enclosed the land in question. m. 20, dorso.

An assize, &c., if John . . . had unjustly disseised William de Mere of common of pasture in . . . appertaining to his free tenement in Hannecherche. John appeared and stated William was never seised as of fee of the common of pasture, and Stephen de Holedych, William de Bagenholt, Walter de Stanleg, William Atte Stanylond, recognitors, never appeared (sic, left unfinished).

An assize, &c., if Joan, widow of Alan de Englefeud, and William de Overton, Clerk, had unjustly disseised Margaret de Engelfeud of her free tenement in Humelegh (Himley) and Swyndon, viz., of a messuage and five virgates of land.

Joan answered for herself and William, and stated an assize ought not to be taken, because she entered through the verdict of a Court held before the Justices at Lychefend in a trial against one John de Engelfeud.

Margaret stated that at the time Joan had sued out her writ of dower against the said John, John held nothing in the said lands, because she was in seisin of them. The jury find a verdict for Margaret. m. 20 b.

Convention enrolled between John de Somervile on one part, and Domina Jona, relict of Dominus Stephen de Miners, on the other, by which John remitted his claim against her until the full age of John, son and heir of the said Stephen de Miners (nature of claim not given). m. 20 b.

Amice, the widow of Henry de Verdun, was summoned to render up to Robert de Staundon, Henry, son and heir of the said Henry, who is within age, and whose wardship and marriage belonged to Robert, inasmuch as Henry the father held of him by Knight's service his land in Levedale, viz., by the service of a small fee of Morteyne, rendering for the scutage of 40s. two marks, and less or more in proportion, and he being in seisin of the homage and scutage of the said Henry, Amice had abducted from him the heir, by which he had been damaged to the extent of 100 marks.

Amice appeared and did not deny the facts as stated, and was ordered to deliver up the heir, and as the heir was not present, nor in these parts, to find pledges, viz., John de Houton and Roger de Pyvelesdon, to deliver the heir to Robert at Salop at fifteen days from Michaelmas. m. 20, dorso.

Eudo de Salt sued Robert Musbert for twelve acres of land in Salt, in which the said Robert had no entry except by a disseisin which Thomas Doun had unjustly made of John de Mutton, the father of Eudo, whose heir he is.

Robert stated that the said Thomas had never disseised John de Mutton, but that the said John whilst in good seisin of the land had enfeoffed in it William de Burston, grandfather of Robert. A jury was summoned to be at Salop for the morrow of All Souls. A postscript states that the jury found that John de Mutton was in seisin of the said tenement, and the said Thomas had disseised him of it, and the said tenement had afterwards fallen into the hands of John, by reason of a felony committed by Thomas; and John had then enfeoffed in it William de Burston the grandfather of Robert, and Robert is in seisin of it as heir of his grandfather. Eudo is therefore in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 21.

An assize, &c., if Geoffrey Griffyn of Cleydon had unjustly disseised Robert de Knotton of his common of pasture in Cleyton Griffyn, which belonged to his free tenement in Knotton, viz., of common of pasture in twenty acres in which he had been accustomed to common for the whole year with all manner of cattle.

Geoffrey conceded that Robert had common of pasture for the open season, but not for the whole year. The jury gave a verdict for Geoffrey, stating Robert had no right of common except during the open season after the hay and corn had been carried. m. 22.

An assize, &c., if Margaret, mother of Alice, the wife of Thomas Pani, and of Margaret, the wife of Henry del Park, and of Phelippa, the wife of Henry de Wyvereston, was seised as of fee, &c., of a messuage and twenty acres of land in Aysseleg (Ashley) when she died, which Geoffrey de Brumleg holds. A concord was made. m. 22.

The Abbot of Bildwase was sued by Thomas Pani and Alice his wife in a plea that he should permit them common of pasture in Bleminghull as they had formerly. A concord was made. m. 22.

An assize if Robert de Paginton, father of Geoffrey de Paginton, was seised, &c., of a messuage and twenty acres of land in Paginton, of which Henry de Pakinton and Henry de Swynefen hold the messuage, and Magister William de Attelberg holds the twenty acres.

Magister William called to warranty William, son of Reginald de Acclebiry, who is to be summoned to be at Salop for the morrow of All Souls; and Henry de Packinton and Henry de Swinefen never appeared, and are to be re-summoned for the same date. m. 22, dorso.

An assize, &c., if Robert de Huggeford, Richard de Stoke, and thirteen others named, had disseised William de Pulton of common of pasture in three hundred acres in Hildriston, where he was accustomed to common for all the year with all manner of cattle.

The same assize by the same recognitors came, &c., if William Bagot and nine others named had unjustly disseised William de Pulton of common of pasture in three hundred acres of land in Hildriston, &c. (as before).

The same assize by the same recognitors came, &c., if William Bagot, Matilda de Huggeford, Robert de Huggeford, Philip, son of Walter de Mulewyce, William, son of Henry de Fossebrok, and seventeen others (named), had unjustly disseised William de Hildulveston of common of pasture in two hundred acres of land in Hildulveston, in which, &c. (as before). William de Pulton afterwards appeared and withdrew his writ against all, and he and his sureties are in misericordiâ.

It was afterwards agreed between them that the said Robert de Huggeford, lord of all the manor of Hildreston, conceded for himself and his men of that manor, that William de Pulton and his heirs should have common of pasture in the manor with all manner of cattle during the open season only. m. 22, dorso.

John le Eyr of Bradeleg sued Robert de Huggeford for two parts of the manor of Hildulveston, excepting half a virgate of land, in which Robert had no entry except through Richard fitz Arnold, the grandfather of John, whose heir he is, who had demised the land to one Robert fitz Odo for the term of ten years. Robert (de Huggeford) appeared and called to warranty William de Hugeford, who came and warranted the land to him, and called to warranty William Bagod, who was present and warranted the land to him, and stated that Robert fitz Odo did not enter by the said Richard fitz Arnold, but by one Robert de Stafford, and he appealed to a jury. The jury say that the said Robert fitz Odo had entry by Robert de Stafford, and not by Richard fitz Arnold. (fn. 14) m. 23.

Roger, Bishop of Coventry and Lychfeld, sued Magister John Giffard for the manor of Chylinton, excepting ten messuages, four virgates, and one hundred and forty acres of land, as the right of his Church.

John appeared and called to warranty John fitz John, who is to be summoned to be at Salop on the morrow of All Souls; John fitz John to be summoned in Bucks. m. 23.

An assize, &c., if John de Swynnerton, Robert Bochard, and thirteen others named, had unjustly disseised Robert de Cotes of his free tenement in Cotes. Robert afterwards withdrew his claim, and he and his sureties are in misericordiâ, viz., Robert, son of John de Cotes, and Richard de Spyna of the same. A convention was afterwards made between them, by which John conceded to Robert and his heirs the tenement, saving to John and his heirs common of pasture in it for all cattle throughout the year. And upon this the Bailiff of the Bishop of Lichfield and Coventry appeared and said that the tenement belonged to his lord, and he put in his claim to it. m. 23.

Robert, son of Roger Buffari, sued Philip, Abbot of Cumbe, for a messuage and six virgates of land and a mill in Trescote, of the fee of Penne Boffare, (fn. 15) as his right, of which William his ancestor had been seised as of fee, &c., in the time of King Henry, the grandfather of the present King, and from William the right descended to another William as son and heir, and from this William to Gilbert as son and heir, and from Gilbert (sic) to Robert, who now sues as son and heir, and in which the said Abbot had no entry except by a demise which William the great grandfather (proavus) of the said Robert had made to William fitz Guy de Offaneye of Bromwych for a term of ten years. And the Abbot appeared and defended his right, and prayed for judgment on the plea that the writ was a writ of entry, which could not go beyond the last return of King John, &c., and Robert had claimed from the seisin of an ancestor of the time of King Henry, the grandfather of the King. Adjourned to Salop on the morrow of St. Martin. m. 23.

Philip de Draycote, Knight, Reginald, the Rector of the Church of Legh, and Richard de Sondbach, acknowledge they owe to Robert de Grendon 104½ marks for ten bovates of land in Dodesley which the said Robert had remitted and quit-claimed to them. m. 28.

Derby. An assize, &c., if Henry de Verdun, father of Henry de Verdun the younger, was seised, &c., of 40s. rent in Swartlingcote when he died, and of which rent Geoffrey de Griseley had deforced him. Geoffrey appeared and stated he claimed nothing but wardship, by reason of the non-age of the said Henry, inasmuch as his father had held the tenement of him by Knight's service. Henry stated that his father Henry had never held the said rent of Geoffrey by Knight's service, because he held it in soccage, and by certain service, viz., for four farthings as his purparty, inasmuch as one Robert de Gresele, the abavus of Geoffrey, had enfeoffed one Ingold his brother, the ancestor of Henry, of certain tenements, rendering for them yearly 12 farthings for all service, and he produced the Charter of Robert the ancestor of the said Geoffrey to this effect.

Geoffrey stated that notwithstanding the charter, he and his ancestors from the date of it had always been in seisin of those things which were appurtenant to Knight's service for the said tenements, and which had been always rendered by the ancestors of the said Henry. (fn. 16)

The jury say that the ancestors of the said Henry had always from the date of the charter performed military service to the ancestors of the said Geoffrey, such as rendering scutage when it fell due, and aid to marry his eldest daughter, and to make his eldest son a Knight and other things pertaining to Knight's service, and they had rendered suit of Court from three weeks to three weeks, and the Sheriffs aid. Henry is therefore in misericordiâ, but his fine is remitted because he is under age. m. 29, dorso.

Derby. William de Rideware sued Margaret de Ferrars, Countess of Derby, to deliver up to him the custody of the manor of Hulton, appertaining to him inasmuch as Henry de Bek held it of him by Knight's service. The Countess did not appear; and is to be attached to appear at Salop at a month from Michaelmas. m. 30, dorso.

Essoins "de malo veniendi," taken at Lichfeld on the morrow of Trinity, 56 H. III.

Staff. Walter, Parson of Weston, who is in the land of Jerusalem, versus Thomas Meverel, in a plea of land by Richard Denyas. m. 32.

Attorneys.

Roys de Staundon puts in her place Gervase de Levedale or John de Hopes versus Adam de Chetwynde, in a plea of trespass.

Philippa de Dutton puts in her place Alexander de Banvile or John de Offeleg versus Amicia de Verdun, in a plea of marriage (of heir), and versus Robert de Ferrars in a plea of land. m. 36.

Amice de Verdun puts in her place Elias de Verdun versus Robert de Staundon and Geoffrey de Gresele in a plea of wardship. m. 36, dorso.

Thomas Pany and Alice his wife put in their place Walter de Elmele and Richard Buch versus Geoffrey de Pycheford and Mary his wife in a plea of customs and services. m. 36, dorso.

Henry de Parco and Margaret his wife put in their place the same Walter and Richard versus William de Drayton and Margaret his wife in a plea of rent.

Thomas Pany and Alice his wife put in their place the same Walter and Richard versus the same William and Margaret in a plea of rent. m. 36, dorso.

Magister John Giffard puts in his place John Giffard his brother versus Roger, Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, in a plea of fishery.

The same John puts in his place Richard Burdun versus the same Bishop in a plea of land.

Hundred of Totmanslawe.

William Koyner (Coyney), Chief Bailiff.

Jury.
William Wyther.
Philip de Dreycote.
John Koyne.
Robert Yakeovere (de Akovere).
Henry de Costerne.
Roger de Hales.
William de Akovere.
Roger de Verney.
Thomas de Tene.
Robert Shyrard.
Thomas Meverel electors.
Henry de Bradeheved electors.

Hundred of Pyrhull.

William de Hodenet, Chief Bailiff.

Jury.
Thomas de Kersewall electors.
William de Norton electors.
Roger Bidolf.
John de Grendon.
Henry, son of Hugh de Colton.
John de Swynnerton.
Geoffrey de Brumleg.
Henry de Hexstall.
Roger de Bissopeston.
William de Mere.
Thomas de Venables, in Aston.
Henry de Dodinton.
John de Mere.

Hundred of Couthelleston.

Robert de Mounselowe, Chief Bailiff.

Jury.
Hugh de Weston electors.
Michael de Morton electors.
Robert Teverey.
Robert de Knitteleye.
Nicholas de Bedenhale.
John de Engleton.
Robert de Weston.
Robert de Somerford.
Robert le Flemeng.
Roger de Pycheford.
Adam del Park.
[Ed. - Text scored out] Philip de Mutton

Hundred of Seylesdon.

William le Enfant, Chief Bailiff.

Jury.
Richard de Evenesfeld electors.
Henry de Prestwoode electors.
William de Wytinton.
William de Overton.
William Warin.
Walter Denys.
Thomas de Luttilleg.
John de Wyleston.
Hugh de Wrottesle.
John de Tresel.
John de Gaywode.
William de Perton.

Hundred of Offelowe.

Thomas de Linton, Chief Bailiff.

Jury.
William de Dorlaston electors.
Nicholas de Alrewyz electors.
Peter (de) Tok, Knight.
Robert de Hulton.
Peter de Colecestre.
William de Sterchay.
Richard de Pype.
Robert de Freford.
William de Tatenhull.
Nicholas de Rideware.
John le Venur.
William le Chamberlayn.

These were Sheriffs in co. Stafford since the last Iter of the Justices, viz., Robert de Grendon, Hugh de Acovere, Peter de Monteforti, William Bagot, William de Caverswelle, James de Audideleye, Hamon l'Estrange, Ralph Basset, Walter de Hopton, Urian de St. Pierre, Hugh de Mortimer.

These were Coroners since the same Iter, viz., Robert Selweyn, Bertram de Burgo, William de Chetinton (Chettleton), and John de Chaure (Charnes), who are still coroners.

Engleschery is presented in this county as all the county has recorded. m. 38.

The jury of the manor of Penkrich appeared by twelve, and presented that Richard de Loges had taken one Alice de Wodegreve from the vill of Rodbaldeston, to his house against her will, et concubuit cum ipsâ, and afterwards allowed her to depart, and she prosecuted her appeal against him from County Court to County Court, until Richard gave her half a mark to desist; and the same Richard took from Robert Tenerey six oxen and a bull in the manor of Pencriz, yoked in the plough (caruca) of Robert, and carried them to his manor of Rubbaston (Rodbaston), and made them plough his land there; and he afterwards sent them to his manor of Barwe, in co. Leycester, and afterwards he came with a hue and cry, and put upon Robert that the said oxen had been stolen from his park of Rodbaston. The Sheriff is therefore commanded to cause him to appear. The jury say also that the same Richard de Loges took from Ralph, the Canon of Pencrych, who had come to Richard's Court at Rodbaston, a horse against the will of the said Ralph; afterwards the said Richard and Robert appeared, and Robert stated he did not wish to prosecute Richard for the above, because it was done during a time of war. Richard is therefore quietus for the trespass against Robert, but for the trespass against the woman was fined 40s. William Trumwyne and William de Handesacre are his sureties. m. 38.

From Richard de Thyckebrome and Simon his son to be under plevin until the Hundred Court, half a mark. m. 38.

The manor of Totenhale came by twelve jurymen and stated that the Church of Tetenhall is a free Chapel of the Lord the King, and Dominus Peter de Wynton holds it of the gift of the King, and it is worth 50 marks per annum; and to the said Church there are five Prebends, and the collation to the Prebends belongs to the said Peter.

Of Sergeanties they say that William de Perton holds the manor of Perton by Sergeanty; and that when the King goes into Wales to make war, the said William must follow him with himself and a horse armed for eight days at his own cost, and if detained more than eight days, he receives for each day 8d. from the King for his wages; and his land is worth 5 marks yearly. The same William renders to the King 5s. for a virgate and a half of land, formerly alienated by an ancestor of the said William; and the said rent is accounted for (arentatur) at the Exchequer.

The jury present that Nicholas de Ake and Adam Dote hold of the King a hide of land in this manor, and render to the King 2s. per annum for the land, and it is worth by the year 1 mark, and they do suit at the manor every three weeks. m. 38, dorso.

The Hundred of Seisdon presented that the Church of Wolrehampton is of the gift of the King, and the King gave it to Tedesius de Camilla, who now holds it, and it is worth by the year 40 marks. Of defaulters they say that the Abbot of Bordesle, the Abbot of Hales, Robert Burnel, and Adam de Hemenelegh, did not appear on the first day. They are therefore in misericordiâ, and Walter de Cokesle and Peter de Chaluns never appeared.

The Hundred belongs to the King, and renders 10 marks yearly.

Respecting Valets, they say that William de Stafford, Ralph de Byssopbyri, Richard de Evenesfeud, Walter de Overton, and Robert Buffare hold full Knights' fees, and are of full age and not yet Knights. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 40.

The Hundred of Cuttlestone presented that Walter de Elmedon held the vill of Huntidon by the sergeanty of guarding the King's Haye of Teddesley, and he renders besides to the King 32d. yearly. Also William Trumwyne holds a virgate of land in the vill of Canetburne by Sergeanty of guarding the King's Haye of Clent, and he renders also to the King 20d.

Also they say that Hugh de Loges held a carucate of land in Rodbaldeston by the Sergeanty of guarding the King's Forest of Kenok, but in consequence of a trespass committed by the said Nicholas (sic) against the King, the King had taken the bailiwick and the land into his hands, and the said Nicholas (sic) had given the King 200 marks to hold the land without the bailiwick for term of his life; and the King afterwards gave the bailiwick to Sir (Dominus) Thomas de Washam, who now holds it of the King's gift in fee, and it is worth 20 marks yearly, and Richard de Loges now holds the land, but they don't know by what warrant. Enquiry is therefore to be made into the matter. It was afterwards testified that the King had impleaded the said Richard for the tenement before the Justices of the Bench. The matter is therefore to stand over till the plea is discussed.

Of defaulters, they say that the Lord the Bishop of Chester, Roger de Someri, and Philip Marmiun did not appear on the first day. They are therefore in misericordiâ.

The jury say that the Bishop holds pleas of forbidden distress (de namio vetito), and it is not known by what warrant. The Sheriff is commanded to summon the Bishop.

Of Valets, they say that Nicholas de Stafford, Thomas de Haleweton, Robert de Knythteley, Hugh de Weston, Bertram de Burgo, Henry de Bromley, and John Gyffard, lord of Chilynton, hold full Knights' fees and are of full age, and not yet Knights. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 41, dorso.

Richard de Bromhale and Philip de Cornedale were together in the vill of Chenedon, and a dispute arising between them, Richard struck the said William (sic) on the head with a sword and killed him, and Richard immediately fled, and is suspected. He is therefore to be put in the exigent (fn. 17) and outlawed. He had no chattels. Bertram de Burgo made the inquest, and the manors of Breuwode, Chilynton, Acton, and Gunston refused to appear. They are therefore to be called up for judgment. m. 42, dorso.

John, son of John de Hyldeneston, accused in the County Court William, son of Robert de Eyton, and Richard his brother for mayhem, robbery, and breach of the King's peace, and he never appeared. He is therefore to be apprehended, and his sureties are in misericordiâ. And William now appeared and denied the accusation, and put himself on the country, and offered the King a mark pro habendâ bonâ inquisitione. The jury say that Richard is dead, and that William is not guilty of any robbery or mayhem, but had wounded the said John. He is therefore taken into custody, and afterwards fined half a mark. His sureties are Richard Bracun and Philip de Mutton. m. 42, dorso.

* * * * *

The Hundred of Tatemonnelowe appeared by twelve jurymen, and presented that

Alan de Boterdon fell from a horse into a "wassel" outside the vill of Lek, and was drowned. No one is suspected. Judgment—Misadventure. The value of the horse is 3s.

* * * * *

Of defaulters, they say that

Edmund, the King's son, John de Verdun, James de Audeleye, Adam, son of Hugh de Chetelton, Elias de Flambstede ( . . . . ), and John de Dadelonde did not come on the first day. They are therefore in misericordiâ.

Elias de Gresele abused Roger at the bridge outside the vill of Roucestre, and a contention arising between them, Elias struck Roger with a stone on the head, of which Roger died four days afterwards. Elias fled, and is suspected. He is therefore to be put in the exigent and outlawed. He had no chattels, but was of the household of the Abbot of Roucestre. The Abbot is therefore in misericordiâ (for not producing him), and the vills of Roucestre, Denstun, Combrugg, and Whydekeshull did not come to the inquest. They are therefore in misericordiâ.

It was afterwards testified that Margaret, the wife of Roger, and Henry le Mareschall his brother, appealed the said Elias and William his brother for the death of Roger in the County Court, and they had been outlawed at the suit of the said Margaret and Henry. The chattels of William are worth 7s., for which the Sheriff is responsible. m. 43, dorso.

Matilda de Warwyk found Hugh her husband beheaded outside the vill of Chedle, and the jury state that the said Hugh was a robber, and flying from the King's peace was beheaded, and the said Matilda, out of anger at finding her husband beheaded, had killed her own three boys, and immediately fled. She is therefore to be put in the exigent, and waiviata. And the said Hugh and Matilda had no chattels. No Engleschery was presented, therefore judgment of murder against the Hundred, and the vills of Dylverne, Baston, Tene, and Bromshulf did not come to the inquest. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 43, dorso.

Adam, son of Henry de Boterdon, found a man and a boy dead with cold and hunger outside the vill of Boterdon. And Adam did not appear, and was attached by Henry, son of Margery of Buterdon, and Robert, son of Richard of the same. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 44.

The jury present that Sir (Dominus) William de Caverswell holds this Hundred from the King for term of his life, and renders 10l. annually for it. m. 44.

Agnes, the wife of Nicholas de Dulverne, appealed before the County Court, Richard le Roper, of Bromley Abbots, and three others named for beheading her husband, and she continued her suit to the fourth County Court, and the County then admitted them to bail till the advent of the Justices. And Agnes did not appear before the Justices to prosecute them. She is therefore to be taken into custody, and her sureties, viz., Roger, son of Robert de Caverswalle, and Thomas his son are in misericordiâ. The defendants did not appear before (the Justices), and it was testified that a concord had been made. Their sureties are therefore in misericordiâ, and for the sake of the King's peace the matter must be inquired into by a jury. The jury stated that the said Nicholas stole a horse, and would not stand to the King's peace on the demand of the said Richard and the others, and was beheaded by them. m. 44, dorso.

* * * * *

The Liberty of Eccleshale presented that

Adam de Whytegrave and Richard, son of Thomas the Baker, were together in the market place of Stafford, and a contention arising between them, Adam struck Richard with an axe on the head, and Richard died the next day. Adam fled, and is suspected. He is therefore to be put in the exigent, and outlawed. His chattels are worth 13s. 4d., and he was in the tything of Whytegreve, which is therefore in misericordiâ (for not producing him). No Engleschery was presented. Therefore judgment of murder against the said liberty. And the vills of Great Brucheford and Little Brucheford, Creswall and Cesteford did not appear at the inquest. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 45, dorso.

* * * * *

The Hundred of Pyrhull appeared by twelve jurymen, and presented that John, the Chaplain of Colton, came to the house of Nicholas de Colton, in the vill of Colton, and, intending to strike a certain stranger, struck Christiana, the wife of the said Nicholas, in the stomach with a knife, of which she died on the third day. And John straightway fled, and is suspected. He is therefore to be put in the exigent, and outlawed. His chattels are worth 8s. 6d., for which the Sheriff answers. No Engleschery was presented. Therefore judgment of murder against the Hundred. And the vills of Couton, Bromley Bagot, Bromley Abbots, and Blithefeud did not appear at the inquest. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 46.

Richard Meverel, of Blore, and Roger, son of Robert Steynolf, and William Turnabute Acton, and William, son of Hugh de Blore, were together at Ledebrychtewell, and a contention arising between them, the said Roger and William and William killed Richard Meverel, and straightway buried him. And afterwards they fled, and are suspected. Therefore they are to be put in the exigent, and outlawed. The jury say that the said Roger and others killed Richard with the assent and by the procurement of Margaret, the wife of Richard, who immediately withdrew herself. She is therefore to be put in the exigent, and to be waiviata. The chattels of Roger are worth 24s. 1d., and those of Margaret 14s. 2d., for which the Sheriff answers. William and William had no chattels. The vills of Bucleston, Alkemunton, Blore, and Okle did not appear at the inquest, and are in misericordiâ. m. 46, dorso.

Of defaulters, they say that the Bishop of Chester, James de Audeleye, John de Verdun, Hamon le Estrange, John de Luttelburi, and John de Baskerville did not appear on the first day. They are therefore in misericordiâ.

William de Colewyz the Chaplain and Robert his Dean were coming from the house of Robert de Wolseley, and a contention arising between them, William the Chaplain struck Robert on the back with a hatchet, of which he immediately died. And William fled, and is suspected. He is therefore to be put in the exigent, and to be outlawed. His chattels are worth 26s. 8d., for which the Sheriff answers. And the vills of Wolsley, Bysshopeton, Colewyz, and Haywode did not appear at the inquest, and are in misericordiâ. m. 47.

Stephen (de) Bydolf and Osebert, of the same, were together in the vill of Bydolf, and a contention arising between them, Osbert struck Stephen with a knife in the stomach, of which he died on the morrow. And Osbert fled, and is suspected. He is therefore to be put in the exigent, and outlawed. His chattels are worth 25s. 7d., for which the Sheriff answers. The vills of Betteley, Aston-Weston, and Burwardeslyme (Burslem) did not appear at the inquest, and are in misericordiâ. m. 47, dorso.

Richard, son of Richard de Whytefeld, and Robert de Swynaferton were together in the Court of the Lord of Swynaferton (Swynnerton), and a contention arising between them, Richard struck Robert with a knife, and made him fall, and Robert struck Richard again with a knife in the stomach, and killed him, and he fled to the Church of Swynefarton, acknowledged the deed, and abjured the Kingdom before the Coroner. He had no chattels, and it was afterwards testified that Robert died. And the vill of Swynforton did not take Robert into custody when the deed took place in the daytime. It is therefore in misericordiâ. m. 47, dorso.

Roger Bydolf, one of twelve jurymen, concealed 12s. of the chattels of a felon. He is therefore to be taken into custody. m. 47, dorso.

* * * * * *

Of Valets, they say that the Barony of Stafford is held in capite of the King, and is worth 100l. per annum, and Nicholas de Stafford, the heir of the Barony, holds it, and has been given in marriage by the King to a daughter of Geoffrey de Langeley.

The jury say that Geoffrey Griffyn holds this Hundred in fee of the King, and renders to the King 6½ marks yearly, and it is worth 20l.

Of Valets, they say that Geoffrey de Gresele, Thomas de Haleton, Hugh de Weston, William de Mere, William Bagot of Bromlegh, and Thomas Meverel of Gayton, hold entire Knight's fee, and are of full age, and are not yet Knights. They are therefore in misericordiâ. Likewise Nicholas, Baron of Stafford.

Some unknown malefactors came to the house of Richard le Despencer in Neuton and killed him. They straightway fled, and it is not known who they were, and the vills of Neuton, Dreycote, Leye, and Creswalle did not come to the inquest, and are in misericordiâ. m. 49.

Of Serjeanties, they say that Peter de Arderne, John de Uffeley (Offley), and Robert de Knotton hold the manor of Knotton by the serjeanty of finding three horsemen armed for the custody of the castle of Newcastle-under-Lyme for forty days, at their own cost, and the serjeanty is now commuted (arentata) at 4l. 6s. 6d.

The jury of the Liberty of Newcastle-under-Lyme stated that respecting encroachments (purprestura), Robert de Stafford fifteen years before had enclosed sixty acres of land of the soil of the sokemanni Regis in this manor, which used to be common to all the men of the King in this manor, both freemen as well as sokemen (tam liberis quam sokemannis), and Nicholas de Stafford now holds the same; and similarly James de Audeley had approved of the same common forty acres of land, and the land of the said James is now in the King's hands. The matter to be inquired into. m. 49, dorso.

* * * * * *

The borough of Stafford came by twelve jurymen and stated that—

William de Hecstal and Adam, son of William, were together in the house of William de Burges, and a contention arising between them out of an old hatred, the said Adam struck William with a knife in the stomach and killed him, and Adam straightway fled, and is suspected. Therefore he is to be put in the exigent, and to be outlawed. He has no chattels, and is in no tything, because he is a Clerk. No Engleschery was presented, therefore judgment of murder against the Borough.

Respecting prises (de prisis), they say that Roger Doget, the Constable of Certesleye (Chartley), took a doleum of wine from Richard Gilbert, who was carting wine from the cellars of St. Botolph, and forced him to carry it to the Castle of Certesleye to his own use, and the value of it was 5 marks, of which he paid nothing, and they say the same Roger takes prises in the vill of Stafford of bread, meat, fish, and other things against the will of those to whom the things belong and pays nothing for them. The Sheriff is ordered to produce him before the Court. m. 50.

The jury say that Ralph Wymer holds the King's vivary in the vill of Stafford, and renders to the King half a mark yearly, and it is worth 10s.

* * * * * *

The Borough of Newcastle came by twelve jurymen.

Respecting encroachments, they stated that Nicholas, son of Henry, had made an encroachment in the Liberty of Newcastle on the high road three feet in width and fifteen in length, to the injury of the whole country, and Stephen Ergan had also made an encroachment in the same manner, and Thomas, lord of Tynteshovere (Tittensor), had made a ditch twenty feet in length and six feet in width upon the same road to the injury of the whole country. The Sheriff is ordered to remove the encroachments at the cost of the persons who made them. m. 50, dorso.

* * * * * *

The Hundred of Offelawe appeared by twelve jurymen, and stated that—

William de Sutton, a monk of Canewall, had struck Roger de Hundesacre with a stick on the head, and Roger died five days afterwards, and William had fled, and is suspected; therefore he is to be put in the exigent, and outlawed. He had no chattels, and was in the manupastu of the Prior of Canewell. The Sheriff is ordered to produce the Prior, who came and was fined 1 mark, for which Ralph Basset of Drayton is surety. m. 52.

John de Pendeford and John le Mouner (miller) of Rideware Mauveysin, fell into contention on the high road between those vills, and John de Pendeford struck John the Miller on the head with a stick, and John the Miller struck again the said John in the stomach with a knife, so that he died on the following day; and John straightway fled and is suspected; therefore he is to be put in the exigent, and outlawed. His chattels are worth 18d., for which the Sheriff answers, and he was received in the vill of Rideware Mauveysin out of his tything. It is therefore in misericordiâ, and the vills of Rideware Mauveysin, Rideware Hampstal, Little Rideware, and Blithburi did not appear at the inquest, and are in misericordiâ. m. 52.

John, son of Robert of Eleford, fell from the drawbridge (de ponte vertibile) of William de Parles of Onesworth (Handsworth) into the water and was drowned. The first finder is dead, and is not suspected. Judgment, misadventure. The value of the bridge is 3s., and the vills of Onesworth, Pyrie, Bromwyz, and Horburne appraised falsely the deodand. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 52.

Some unknown malefactors came to the house of Richard de la Ford in Bromle, and broke open the house and carried away all the goods they found in it to the wood of Hundesacre, when a dispute arising between them respecting the division of the goods, some of them wounded one of their companions and left him; and Robert de Okle, the Bailiff of John de Baskervill (fn. 18) at Hundesacre, Roger, the son of Robert, and Philip de Erdesle took him into custody, and on the third day afterwards they beheaded him without view of the Coroner, or any assembly of the neighbours. They are therefore to be taken into custody. m. 52, dorso.

Agnes de Morton had fled through fear because she sheltered a certain strange woman. (fn. 19) And the jury do not suspect her. Therefore she may return if she pleases, but her chattels are confiscated for her flight. They are worth 8s., for which the Sheriff answers; and William de Chandos had taken her chattels without warrant. He is therefore in misericordiâ.

Respecting defaulters, they say that the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield, William de Oddingseles, Robert de Dunes, John de Wauton, Ralph Basset of Drayton, the Abbot of Hales (who is infirm), Margaret, Countess of Ferrars, Roger Cocus of Wychenoure, Richard, son of Richard of the same, and Jordan Skil of the same place, did not appear on the first day. They are therefore in misericordiâ. m. 53.

The jury present that this Hundred belongs to the King, and William de Parles holds it of the King for term of his life, and he renders for it 12 marks.

Respecting Valets, they say Geoffrey de Caunville, Thomas Corbet, Henry de Erdinton, and John de Herunville hold full Knight's fees, and are of full age, and are not yet Knights. They are therefore in misericordiâ.

Matilda, the widow of Robert de Rughleg (Rowley), appealed in the County Court William de Hundesacre, Robert de Blakegrave, Richard, son of Jordan de Barre, and Henry de Acton, for the death of her husband Robert, and she did not appear. She is therefore to be taken into custody. And William now appeared and stated that Robert de Rughleg was a common robber, and he was looking for him and found him in Waleshale, and Robert fled and would not stand to the King's peace. Therefore they beheaded him and he appealed to a jury. The jury say that Robert was a robber, and had beheaded one of his companions at Waleshale, and William and others coming up, wished to apprehend him, and Robert defended himself and fled, and they had killed him in consequence; and they say that he was a robber, and was flying from the King's peace (diffugiens de pace). Therefore William and the others are acquitted; and they say that Matilda appealed the said William and the others named at the instigation of William de Mortheyn and Robert his brother. They are therefore to be taken into custody. m. 53.

Alice, the wife of William le Veynur of Rideware, appealed in the County Court, John, son of Thomas de Tamenhorne, and Richard le Rus, of Lichefeld, for the death of her husband; and they were outlawed at the suit of the said Alice, and the outlawry was promulgated against them at the fourth County Court, as is shown by the Rolls of Bertram de Burgo, Coroner, and of William de Chetelton, Coroner, and it was erased from the Roll of Robert Selweyn Coroner. Therefore the lands and tenements of the said Robert are to be taken into the King's hands, and Henry Selweyn his Clerk is to be committed to prison; and the chattels of Richard are worth 11s., for which the Sheriff answers, and he had a house of which the year and waste belongs to the King, and is worth 9s., for which the Sheriff answers. John had no chattels. Afterwards Robert Selweyn came and fined for himself and Clerk 10 marks, for which William de Hondesacre, Bertram de Burgo, Hugh de Tymore, Henry Cocy, William de Offeley, William de Rydeware, Roger de Rydeware, and John le Merluz, are sureties. m. 53.

William de la Lynde of Sheneston appealed in the County Court Richard de Thyckebrom, Simon his son, and Henry le Benneyfiver for wounding and robbing him, and he did not appear at the present time to prosecute his appeal. He is therefore to be taken into custody, and the jury say that the defendants are not guilty. m. 53, dorso.

N.B.—The following towns appealed by juries of twelve each at the assizes, viz.:—

Libertas.
The Liberty of Alveton (Alton).
The Liberty of Newcastle-under-Lyme.
Burgus.
The Borough of Newcastle-under-Lyme.
The Borough of Stafford.
The Liberty of Mere.
The Liberty of Penkeris.
The Liberty of Bradeleg.
The Liberty of Tetinhale.
The Liberty of Seggesleye.
The Liberty of Swyneford.
The Liberty of Kynefare.
The Borough of Tuttebiri.
The Liberty of Burton.
The Liberty of Lichefeld.
The Borough of Tamworth and Wyginton.
The Liberty of Wolvrenehampton.
The Borough of Eckeshale.
. . . . (one illegible).
The Manor of Alrewas.
The Manor of Brumle Regis.

Footnotes

1 As a complete transcript in English of this Roll was made for the late Mr. William Salt, and is now in the Wm. Salt Library, the more important suits only have been abstracted for printing in the present volume.
2 Sic in orig., but should be "daughter;" see the suit further on.
3 Sir William de Parles was hanged for felony five or six years afterwards (see Notes on the "Liber Niger," Vol. I., of these Collections). This suit shows the commencement of his troubles.
4 Thomas de Mere, the Parson of Standon, and one of the four coparceners of Maer.
5 See Fine No. 199, dated 1st July, 1272. (Calendar of Fines in this Volume.)
6 By the Statute of Merton, passed about thirty years before this date, lords of manors could enclose the waste lands of the manor, so long as they left sufficient pasturage to the tenants.
7 See Fine No. 237, dated 22nd September, 1272 (Calendar of Fines in this volume).
8 Another suit on the same Roll states Geoffrey gave the manor to Roger the Prior of Trentham. This suit calls Geoffrey the elder the uncle of Geoffrey in one place, and the father in another.
9 The eleven others, who were evidently the free tenants of Sandon holding under the three lords named, were Robert de Whytinacre, Nicholas the carpenter, Gilbert de Smalris, Ralph Balle, Henry Ruffus of Sterthull, Richard de Smalris, Henry Dissemen, William, son of William de Sondon, Henry de Herdewyke, Robert Aythrop, and William, son of the Smith.
10 Hamon I'Estraunge was probably in possession of Chartley by grant of the King, owing to the forfeiture of the Earl of Ferrers for rebellion.
11 See Fine No. 200, dated 17th July, 1272 (Calendar of Fines in this Volume).
12 This suit gives us the name of the heiress of Amblecote who married William de Stafford. Cecilia was doubtless daughter of Robert de Waure who held Amblecote of the Barony of Dudley in the early part of this reign.
13 Pesson or paisson is the pasture for swiue during the season of Mast.
14 Robert fitz Odo of Locksley in Warwickshire was lord of the manor of Hilderston A.D. 1166. See Notes on the "Liber Niger," Vol. I of these Collections.
15 Trescot was divided between the fee of Perton and the fee of Lower Penn or Buffary's Penn.
16 If land was held for a fixed or certain rent, the tenure was by soccage, unless proved to be otherwise. If however the deed of feoffment contained the words "salvo servitio Regis," the land was liable to scutage, and was a tenure by Knight's service, notwithstanding the payment of a fixed rent.
17 Exigendum, i.e., to be called at five successive County Courts. If he failed to appear at the fifth summons he was outlawed.
18 John de Baskerville was probably in possession of Handsacre at this time, owing to the forfeiture of the Lord of Handsacre.
19 A woman probably who had been "waiviata" or outlawed.