Plea Rolls for Staffordshire
2 Edward I

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

Major-General Hon. G. Wrottesley (editor)

Year published

1885

Pages

61-66

Citation Show another format:

'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 2 Edward I', Staffordshire Historical Collections, vol. 6 part 1 (1885), pp. 61-66. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52421 Date accessed: 22 September 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Coram Rege Roll, Hillary, 2 E. I.

Headed, Pleas at Westminster coram Consilio Domini Regis.

Heref. Henry son of Henry de Penebrigge sued Roger de Mortimer and Matilda his wife, and Ralph son of the said Roger, for the manor of Penebrigge, excepting ten librates of land in it, of which they had unjustly disseised Henry his father, whose heir he is.

Roger stated he was tenant of the manor and ready to answer respecting it, and that Henry the father of Henry had conveyed the manor to him and his heirs by his deed, and he had afterwards come of his own accord in full county of Hereford and had there ratified his gift, and he produced the charter of the said Henry to that effect. Henry stated that whatever writings might be produced in the name of Henry his father, the said Roger before the deeds had been drawn up, and whilst his father was in his prison, had intruded himself into the manor, and he had therefore entered by a disseisin and not by the deeds in question.

And Roger prayed judgment whether Henry could recover by a writ of disseisin, when he now acknowledged that his father had conveyed the land by charter.

And Henry pleaded that it was competent for him to sue by writ of entry, in which mention could be made of the imprisonment of his father, and that he had demised the manor to Roger whilst in his prison, but he was likewise ready to prove that his father Henry had never demised the manor to Roger either in prison or out of prison, and was ready to prove that Roger had only entry into it by a disseisin.

And Roger then stated that Henry the father some time after the deeds had been drawn up, and after he (Roger) had been for a long time in seisin of the manor, had appeared in the Court of King Henry III. at Clarendon on the Quindene of St. Martin, 52 H. III., and before all the Justices holding pleas in the Court coram Rege, had acknowledged that he had released and quit claimed to the said Roger and his heirs all his right in the said manor and in the advowson of the Church, and he asked that this might be verified by the Rolls of the Court of that term.

And Henry admitted that his father had made the acknowledgment in question, but stated that for long before he had been detained in the prison of the said Roger at Wygemore, and at the time he made the journey to the King's Court he had handed over to Roger, him (Henry) and his brother Godfrey as hostages, and he and his brother were detained at Roger's manor of Ernewade in co. Salop until their father's return, and that the acknowledgment was made out of fear for his hostages, and of the peril which might befall them, and in order that they might be released from prison.

Roger stated that it did not appear to him that Henry could make inquisition into such a fact or verify his statement, that the Courts of the Lord the King were free and open to all, and if any one through fear of death and of prison, or from any other apprehension, had suffered disinheritance or other injury he could appear and have his remedy, and that when Henry his father had appeared in the King's Court it was competent for him to have declared the facts and to have obtained the deliverance of his hostages, and because the said Henry made no mention in the King's Court of the hostages nor of any coercion practised upon him, he prayed judgment if Henry could claim any right in the said manor against the acknowledgment of Henry his father made in Court as aforesaid. Verdict for Roger de Mortimer. m. 18.

Coram Rege Roll, Trinity Term, 2 E. I.

Warw. Richard de Loges sued William Bagot, Hervey Bagot, Richard Bagot, Hugh de Loges, and Ralph son of Thomas, for ejecting him vi et armis from his land at Souhe (Sowe), which had been given to him by the late King in consequence of Hugh de Loges his father being out of his mind. The Sheriff returned that the defendants had no lands within his bailiwick by which they could be attached, and it was testified that Ralph had lands at Wythenhaye within his bailiwick, etc., and it was testified that William Bagot had lands in co. Stafford, etc. The Sheriff of Staffordshire to distrain him to appear at fifteen days from St. Martin. m. 1.

Staff. Robert de Ferrars sued Edmund son of King Henry III. in a plea that he might redeem his lands according to the Dictum of Kenilworth, all his lands having been given to Edmund with the exception of the castle and manor of Certeley in co. Stafford, and the vill of Holebrok in co. Derby, on the occasion of the disturbances in the kingdom, the said Robert having offered to redeem his lands at seven years' value.

And Edmund appeared and stated that Robert could not claim the benefit of the Dictum of Kenilworth, because after it was passed and published he had come to him of his own free will and agreed to redeem his lands and himself from prison for a sum of £50,000, to be paid to the said Edmund on the Quindene of St. John the Baptist, 53 H. III., and he had found sureties for this payment, viz., Henry son of the King of Rome, William de Valence Earl of Pembroke, John de Warran Earl of Surrey, William de Beauchamp Earl of Warwick, Roger de Somery, Thomas de Clare, Robert Walraund, Roger de Clifford, Hamon L'Estrange, Bartholomew de Sutley, and Robert de Brywes; and in order to indemnify his sureties Robert had conveyed all his lands to them to hold till the said term, and with the condition that if the above named sum of money was not paid to them at that date, or they were satisfied in some other way, it should be lawful for them to give up all the said land to Edmund, to be held by him and his heirs until such time as he should be paid the whole sum in one payment (simul et semel), viz., £50,000, and in which sum the produce of the land in the meantime should not be included, and he produced the charter of Robert to that effect. (Here follows the charter, which is witnessed by John de la Lynde, Richard Fukeram, John de Mucegros, Stephen de Eddewurth, Bogo de Cnovill, Bartholomew le Peytevyn, and John Russel of Penston.)

Robert de Ferrars pleaded that this charter should not prejudice his claim, because at the time he put his hand to it at Cyppeham on the day of the Apostles Philip and James, 53 H. III., he was in prison, and in such a condition that any act done by him at that time should not prejudice him; that before the deed was made he had been in the King's prison at Wyndesore, and from that prison he was released only as a prisoner upon bail, and taken to Cippeham, where the deed was laid before him and he had put his seal to it when in custody and in fear of his life; and he had afterwards been taken as a prisoner in a cart by armed men, some in the cart and some out of it, to Wallingford Castle, where he was detained a prisoner for three weeks until the Lord Edward who is now King had released him, and he prayed the judgment of the Court if any act of his done in this way whilst a prisoner should prejudice him.

And Edmund answered that Robert after the execution of the charter had come before Magister J. de Chishill who was at that time the King's Chancellor, and had caused the charter to be enrolled on the Chancellor's Roll, word for word, and it was not competent for him to plead that an act done before the King or before the Chancellor who represented the person of the King, was done as a prisoner.

Robert admitted he had acknowledged the validity of his charter before the Chancellor, but stated he had done it whilst under duress, for on the same day that he had signed the deed at Cyppeham, and whilst he was still a prisoner, the said Magister John had come to him to a chamber (camera) where he was lying in strict custody (ubi jacuit in strictâ custodiâ) and laid before him the said writing and asked him if it had been made by him, and that he had acknowledged it out of bodily fear (ut evitaret periculum corporis sui), and he pleaded that the said acknowledgment should not bind him, because it was made before the Chancellor remote from his Court, and when he had neither Clerk with him nor the rolls of the Chancery, but had come alone into a chamber where he was lying a prisoner, not as a Chancellor, but like a private person of the people (non quasi Cancellarius sed quasi privata persona de populo).

Edmund pleaded that as Robert did not deny he had made the acknowledgment of his deed before the Chancellor of King Henry, nor that it had been enrolled on the Chancellor's Rolls, he could not appeal to a jury now; and the Court found in his favour on the ground they could not go behind the Chancellor's Rolls, more especially when the said Chancellor had quitted office and delivered up his rolls to the King, who had passed them into other custody. m. 6.

Staff. The Sheriff had been ordered to levy twenty-four marks from the lands and tenements of William Bagot, and to have the money in Court in order to reimburse Richard de Littlebyri and Matilda his wife for damages of a disseisin made by the said William of Matilda's tenement in Asseby, and he now returned William held no lands, etc., in his bailiwick. It is testified, however, that William held sufficient land for the purpose in the county, and the Sheriff is ordered to levy the money by the Quindene of St. Martin. m. 9.

Staff. Ralph son of Adam de Gretton sued the Abbot of Hulton in the Court of Newcastle-under-Lyme by close writ of right for fifteen bovates of land in Mixene (Mixon), and the Abbot called to warranty James de Aldedelega, and the suit was transferred coram Rege; and the said Abbot now called to warranty Henry de Aldedelega, who is to be summoned for Easter Term. m. 40.

Banco Roll, Michaelmas, 2—3 E. I.

Salop. The Sheriff had been commanded to return by inquisition the names of the malefactors who had come by night to the park of Adam de Brimton at Langford, and had cut his hay and carried it away to the value of 60s., etc. The Sheriff returned Richard de Holewey, Robert Brun, and three others named, as guilty, and they had been attached, etc., for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 27.

Staff. Roger son of Emma Spingold sued Hugh, son of Henry de Knython (Knighton) for a messuage and a bovate of land in Knython. Hugh appeared and prayed a view. Adjourned to Hillary. m. 29.

Oxon. Roger son of Roger de Oly (Oilli) sued Roger son of John de Oyly for the manor of Kemcote, which Roger de Oylly, the grandfather of Roger son of John, whose heir he is, had demised to Adam Feteplace for term of his life, and which after the death of Adam should revert to the said Roger son of Roger by virtue of a fine levied in the Court of King Henry father of the present King at Oxford (no date named). Roger son of John prayed a view, and the suit is adjourned to Easter. m. 86.

Staff. Constance the widow of Elewin (fn. 1) de Salt sued Henry Wymer (called to warranty by the Prior of St. Thomas), and who warranted to her one-third of a messuage and a carucate of land in Bradele as her dower.

Henry appeared and called to warranty Nicholas son of Robert the Baron of Stafford, who also appeared and warranted the tenement to him, and conceded the right of Constance to dower in it. Constance is therefore to recover seisin of her dower against the Prior, and the Prior to be compensated by Nicholas. m. 98, dorso.

Staff. Henry de Stamford sued William the Abbot of Hulton for depriving him of 335 loaves of convent bread, 355 gallons of convent beer, 1,082 fercula de coquinâ, and 3 pigs, 25 quarters of oats (avenæ), and hay for a horse for one year, the shoeing of a horse for half a year, and 90 loaves, and 225 gallons of beer, and 235 fercula for the maintenance of a groom, the footgear (calciatura) of a groom for three years, and straw for the bed of the said Henry for eight years, of 340 convent loaves, and 90 servants' loaves, and 366 gallons of convent beer, and 225 gallons of servants' beer and 194 fecula de coquinâ, and 3 pigs, and 225 fecula (sic) for a groom, the footgear (calciatura) of a groom, 21 quarters of oats, and hay sufficient for the maintenance of a horse, and the shoeing of the same, and straw sufficient for a bed, all which he was accustomed to receive each year at the Abbey of Hulton according to the deed of the Abbot and Convent which he held. The Abbot did not appear, and is to be attached for five weeks from Easter. m. 93, dorso.

Staff. William de Acovere (Okeover) and Alice his wife give a mark for license of concord with the Abbot of Burton. m. 88, dorso.

Staff. Julia the daughter of Robert de Burgheston (Burston) sued Robert de Kingeslegh and Alice his wife, Robert de Bevill and Alienora his wife, Peter son of Seman and Margaret his wife, Robert de Bures and Sibilla his wife, and Thomas de Arderne and Isolda his wife, and Roger de Hales, for a messuage and half a virgate in land in Burgheston. The defendants did not appear, and are to be re-summoned for a month from Easter. m. 84, dorso.

Staff. Robert de Cotes sued William de Nabinton and Mabel his wife for a messuage and a virgate of land in Cotes. The defendants did not appear, and are to be re-summoned for the morrow of the Purification, and the tenement to be taken into the King's hands. m. 61, dorso.

Staff. The Prior of St. John of Stafford sued Richard son of Richard de Stretton to warrant to him eleven acres of land in Duneston, which he claims to hold of him, and for which he holds his deed. Richard did not appear. The Sheriff is ordered to distrain, and to produce him at fifteen days from Hillary. m. 51, dorso.

Staff. Margaret de Ferrars Countess of Derbeye sued Thomas Meverel to give up to her Agnes, the niece and heir of William Herberd, (fn. 2) whose wardship belongs to her, inasmuch as the said William held his land of her by knight's service. Thomas did not appear, and is to be attached for Hillary at three weeks. m. 39.

Warw. Nicholas le Archer sued Margaret la Ruse (fn. 3) for a messuage and two carucates of land, excepting one virgate, in Caldecote. Margaret appeared and prayed a verdict. Adjourned to fifteen days from St. Martin. m. 17, dorso.

Staff. Magister John Gyffard sued Roger the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield to permit him to fish in the water of Okemere as he formerly used to fish there. The Bishop did not appear, and is to be attached by better sureties for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 7, dorso.

Staff. John de Baskerville sued Nicholas de Aldithele for a messuage and forty acres of land, etc., in Aston, and did not appear to prosecute his suit. He and his sureties are in misericordiâ. m. 5, dorso.

Banco Roll, Michaelmas, 2–3 E. I.

Buck. John Giffard of Chilinton appeared against John fitz John in a plea that he should warrant to him the manor of Chilinton, which Roger the Bishop of Coventry and Lichfield claimed as his right. John fitz John did not appear, and the Sheriff returned the writ had reached him too late to execute, and he is therefore commanded to summon him for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 1.

Warw. The Abbot of Cumbe sued William Bagot and Isabella his wife to warrant to him five acres of meadow in Rokeby (Rugby), which he claimed to hold of them, and for which he has their deed. They did not appear, and are to be attached for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 18, dorso.

Footnotes

1 In another place Helewin de Salt.
2 Of Gayton.
3 One of the co-heirs of Walshall.