Plea Rolls for Staffordshire
22 Edward I

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

Major-General Hon. George Wrottesley (editor)

Year published

1886

Pages

8-24

Citation Show another format:

'Plea Rolls for Staffordshire: 22 Edward I', Staffordshire Historical Collections, vol. 7, part 1 (1886), pp. 8-24. URL: http://british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=52449 Date accessed: 30 July 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Banco Roll. Hillary, 22 E. I.

Staff. Hervey Bagot was summoned by Robert son of John Moryz, in a plea that he should acquit him of the service which Edmund son of Nicholas de Stafford exacted of him for the free tenement which he holds of the said Hervey in Ricardescote (Rickerscote), and of which Hervey, who is mesne lord (medius) between them, ought to acquit him; and he stated that he held of the said Hervey a messuage and two carucates of land in Ricardescote by homage and fealty, and the service of 10s. yearly for all service; and the said Edmund distrained him to do suit to his Court at Stafford every three weeks, and he claimed 100s. as damages. Hervey appeared by attorney and acknowledged he ought to acquit the said Robert of the service. m. 73.

Staff. Matilda formerly wife of William de Declinge sued Richard de Adenbrok for a third of ten acres of land and fifteen of moor in Rouleye (Rowley Regis), and she sued Richard de Salugtley for a third of ten acres of land and fifteen of moor in the same vill as her dower. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff is ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and summon them for three weeks from Easter. m. 78.

Warw. Robert son of Henry de Northampton sued Robert de Hastang and John his son for a debt of 6 marks. The defendants did not appear, and are to be attached for the morrow of St. John the Baptist. m. 151.

Staff. Ermegarda formerly wife of Henry de St. Maur sued William de Mortimer and Alianora his wife for a third of a messuage and carucate of land in Flyteleye and Legh which she claimed as dower. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff is ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and summon them for Easter term. m. 157, dorso.

Staff. Richard de Bissupestone, clerk, appeared against William son of Reyner de Bissoppeston in a plea that he should warrant to him a messuage and half a virgate of land in Bissopeston (Bishton) which he holds and claims to hold of him. William did not appear, and is to be attached for Trinity term. m. 129, dorso.

Staff. Adam de Mukleston appeared against Richard de Sonbach in a plea that he should warrant to him six acres and a half of land in Legh which he claims to hold of him. Richard did not appear, and a day was given to him by an essoin de servitio Regis, after he had been distrained. Adam is therefore to recover 20s. for his expenses according to statute. m. 125, dorso.

Staff. William son of Adam de Chetewynde sued Richard son of Henry de Prestwode for causing waste and destruction in houses, woods, etc., in Prestwode near Hastcote, which William had demised to him for the life of Richard. Richard did not appear, and is to be attached for Trinity Term. m. 122, dorso.

Staff. Robert le Mareschal appeared against Roger de Pywelesdon and Joan his wife, and Gilbert son of Geoffrey de Aston, in a plea that whereas the said Robert, Roger and Joan, and Gilbert receive the issues of a certain mill in Aston near Stanes by equal portions, and the mill was destroyed (dirrutum), the said Roger, Joan, and Gilbert refused to contribute to reestablish it. The defendants did not appear, and are to be attached for Trinity term. m. 74, dorso.

Staff. Stephen de Elmedon sued Walter de Elmedon for a messuage and a virgate of land, ten acres of wood, twenty acres of pasture, and 10s. of rent in Huntedon (Huntingdon), by writ of right. Walter appeared by attorney, and with permission of the Court gave up the tenements. Stephen is therefore to recover seisin, and Walter is in misericordiâ, because he had at first refused to give them up. m. 63, dorso.

Staff. Alan de Threngreston and Elena his wife sued Richard de Mortimer for the third of a messuage in Lichefeld as dower of Elena by the dotation of her first husband. Richard stated that John her first husband was never in seisin of the messuage as of fee, and appealed to a jury. A postscript states that at Michaelmas term, 24 E. I., a jury came who stated that John de Camvill, the first husband of Elena, was not seised of the messuage in fee, and could not endow her out of it. Alan and Elena are therefore in misericordiâ for a false claim. m. 25, dorso.

Kanc. Staff. Richard de Wolvernehamton appeared against Ralph de Hengham in a plea that he should warrant to him a messuage, a mill, and a carucate of land in Sundresshe in co. Kent, which John Huberd claimed against him. Ralph did not appear, and the Sheriff of Staffordshire was ordered to take into the King's hand, land belonging to him to the value of the land claimed; and as the value was not known, the Sheriff of Kent was ordered to return its value. A postscript states that the Sheriff of Kent returned its value at Easter, 22 E. I., and the return was challenged by Richard as being below the true value of the land, and the Sheriff was ordered to return it again at Michaelmas term 22 E. I., at which date the Sheriff returned the value at 39s. 10d. The Sheriff of Staffordshire is therefore ordered to take land of Ralph's to that value into the King's hand, and to summon them for Easter term 23 E. I. m. 15, dorso.

Coram Rege Roll. Hillary, 22 E. I.

Staff. A mandate had been sent to the Sheriff that whereas Henry de Wyverston has acknowledged before the Justices Itinerant, 21 E. I., that he owed Laurence de Lodelawe 76s. 4d., and which should have been paid at the Feast of the Annunciation, 21 E. I., and the Prior of Duddele acknowledged he owed to the same £10, and William de Coueleye acknowledged he owed the same 38s. 8d., and Richard son of Thomas de Oldinton, Richard Brid, and William Gerard, and Richard de Mulnehouse acknowledged they owed to the same £14, to be paid at the same date, and the debts had not yet been paid, he was therefore to raise the money on their lands and chattels, and pay it into court at this term; and the Sheriff returned that Henry de Wyvereston was dead. He is therefore commanded as before, and to raise the money and pay it into Court at three weeks from Easter. m. 40.

Staff. Cecilia formerly wife of Roger de Narwedale appealed John de Narwedale for the death of Roger her husband, and stated that John had inflicted on Roger thirteen mortal wounds before the eyes of the said Cecilia, and by which he had been killed. And John appeared and denied the felony, and took exception to the appeal because it made no mention of time or place, nor the weapons by which the wounds were inflicted, nor whether it was a time of peace or war, nor did she offer to deraign it against him as the Court should think fit; and as so many omissions are found in her appeal, it is considered that it was nullified, and that Cecilia should be committed to prison for a false appeal. She is pardoned, however, because the appeal was continued at the suit of the King; and John being asked how he wished to acquit himself of the said death, put himself on the country. A jury is therefore to be summoned coram Rege at the Quindene of Easter, and John is committed to the Marshalsea. A postscript states that a jury came on the Octaves at Michaelmas, 22 E. I., and said on their oaths that John was not guilty. m. 31, dorso.

Staff. Pleas of various counties at Derby at the Quindene of Easter, before Gilbert de Preston and his fellow Justices, 53 II. III. (by writ of certiorari).

Staff. "Alesia formerly wife of Philip de Leye sued Robert de Grendon for two mills in Senestan (Shenstone), and she sued Adam de Gresebrok for a messuage and two acres of land in the same vill as her right by writ of entry; and Robert and Adam appeared and called to warranty Robert de Leye, who was present and warranted the tenements to them, and by permission of the Court gave up to Alesia the tenements in question. She is therefore to have seisin of them, and Robert and Adam are to be compensated from the land of Robert de Leye." In pursuance of the above the Sheriff was ordered to summon Reginald de Legh, Richard de Sambech, and Philip de Draycote, the heirs of the said Robert de Leye, by two legal men of his county, to be present in Court on this day to show cause why Robert de Gresebrok the brother (sic) and heir of Adam de Gresebrok should not be compensated to the value of the land which the said Alesia had recovered. And the Sheriff returned he had summoned Reginald de Legh and Philip de Draycote by William de Stafford and Ralph Basset of Chedele; and Reginald and Philip now appeared by Thomas de Assheburn their attorney, and likewise Robert de Gresebrok, and a day was given to them at a month from Easter prece partium. And respecting the said Richard the Sheriff returned he was not living in his county but in co. Chester, and held no lands in his county, therefore nothing had been done in his case; and it was testified that he took £10 annually from the vill of Leye as the purparty of his inheritance there. The Sheriff is therefore ordered to summon him as before to be present at the above term. A postscript states that at the Quindene of St. John the Baptist, 22 E. I., the said Robert de Gresebrok appeared and likewise Reginald de Legh, and Thomas de Asshebourne stated that Philip (de Draycote) was dead; and as regards Richard de Sandbech the Sheriff returned he had been summoned in proper form. The suit is therefore to proceed against him; and the Sheriff was ordered to value the messuage and two acres in Seneston which Alesia formerly wife of Philip de Leye had recovered against Robert de Legh, and which Robert had warranted to Adam the brother of Robert de Gresebrok, whose heir he is, and so that the said Robert should have of the land of Richard de Sandbech, one of the heirs of Robert de Legh, in a competent place to the value of the tenement so recovered, and to give him seisin of it without delay; and the said Reginald stated that Robert de Gresebrok had conceded and remitted to him, one of the heirs of Robert de Legh, all his action and claim in this matter, and he produced the deed of the said Robert (de Gresebrok) to this effect; and Robert could not deny this. He is therefore to take nothing by this action, and is in misericordiâ; and being asked if he wished to sue Richard son and heir of Philip de Draycote, he answered in the affirmative. The Sheriff is therefore ordered to summon him (Richard) on the morrow of All Souls (fn. 1) to show cause, etc. m. 27, dorso.

Banco Roll. Easter, 22 E. I.

Staff. Thomas de Engleton sued Richard Champyun of Engleton for two parts of a messuage and virgate of land in Engleton; and Roger Jurdan and Edith his wife for a messuage and virgate of land and the third of a messuage and virgate of land excepting one acre; and Roger Cadyhou of Great Sandon for an acre of land in the same vill, in which they had no entry except by a demise which William de Engleton the grandfather of Thomas, and whose heir he is, had made to William de Someford for a term which had expired. Richard called to warranty Robert de Somerford, and Roger and Edith called the same Robert to warranty for the messuage and virgate of land claimed against them; and as regards the third part of the other messuage and virgate, Roger stated he found Edith seised of it as of dower of the inheritance of Richard le Champiun, whom he called to warranty; and Roger Cadyhou called Roger Jurdan to warranty. Adjourned to the Octaves of Michaelmas. m. 3.

Staff. The Sheriff had been ordered to arrest Roes Trussel, lady of Cublesdon, for a debt of nine sacks of wood, of the value of 10 marks each, owing to Laurence de Lodelawe, and of which she had acknowledged the debt on the day of St. John the Baptist, 18 E. I. And the Sheriff returned that Roes was dead. Writ of scire facias to be issued. m. 5.

Staff. Ralph de Rocheford and Agnes his wife were summoned by John de Rocheford in a plea that they should warrant to him sixty acres of land and 100s. 6d. of rent in Gayton and Drengeton (Drineton), which he claimed to hold of them, and for which he held their deed. Ralph and Agnes appeared, and a concord was made, by which Ralph and Agnes acknowledged the said tenements to be the right of John, (fn. 2) etc. m. 12.

Staff. An assize of last presentation to the Church of Northbury (Norbury), the advowson of which the King claimed against Ralph le Botiler and Matilda his wife by reason of the idiotcy of John Walrand, who was in ward to the King. And Nicholas de Warrewyk, who sued for the King, stated that a certain William Walraund and Isabella his wife, the ancestors of John, in the reign of King Henry the King's father, in right of the said Isabella, had presented one John Walraund their clerk, who had been admitted and instituted and afterwards resigned the Church. And after his resignation they had presented William de Berkele their clerk, who had been admitted and died the last parson of the Church; and from Isabella the right of presentation descended to one Robert as son and heir, and from Robert to John as brother and heir.

Ralph and Matilda stated that they held the manor of Northbury, to which manor the advowson of the Church was appurtenant, and that one Philip Marmyun and Joan his wife, the mother of Matilda, and of which she was one of the heirs, formerly held the said manor together with the advowson of the Church as her right and inheritance together with other manors. And after their deaths the same manor together with the advowson had been assigned to Ralph and Matilda, as purparty of the said Matilda; and that William de Berkele had been admitted on the presentation of Philip and Joan, and not of the said William and Isabella as stated by the lord the King; and they appealed to the assize. A postscript states that a jury at the following Trinity term returned a verdict stating that John Walrand had been admitted on the presentation of William and Isabella, and had held the Church for three years, and that the see of Coventry and Lychfield being vacant on his resignation, the said William de Berkele had put himself into the Church by the consent and will of the said John, and had occupied it for thirty-two years without any admission and institution on the part of the Bishop. And as it was shown by the assize that William Walrand and Isabella had presented the last parson, viz., John Walrand, and who had died parson of the Church, it is considered that the King should recover the advowson in right of John Walrand the son and heir of Isabella, who was an idiot in ward to the King, and likewise 10 marks for his damages according to Statute, inasmuch as the Church was taxed at 20 marks. m. 17.

Staff. Ralph le Botiler and Matilda his wife were summoned by Joan de Morteyn, in a plea that they should permit her to present a fit parson to the Church of Northbury (Norbury) which was vacant. And she stated that Philip Marmyun and Joan his wife, the mother of Joan, and of which she was one of the heirs, had presented in the right of Joan to the Church one William de Berkele in the reign of King Henry, the King's father, and who had been admitted and instituted. And from Joan the right of presentation descended to Joan who now sues, and to Mazera and the said Matilda as daughters and heirs of Joan; and the presentation this time belonged to her as the eldest daughter.

Ralph and Matilda denied the claim of Joan, and stated they held the manor of Northbury, to which the advowson was appurtenant, and that the manor together with the advowson had been assigned to them as purparty of Matilda after the death of Philip and Joan ; and being asked by the Justices whether a partition of the said inheritance had been made between the heirs, and if so whether by jury or by lot or by King's writ, they declined to answer, but stated they were ready to prove by a jury that the advowson was appurtenant to the manor and that the manor and advowson had been assigned in purparty to Matilda.

And Joan stated that after the death of Philip and Joan the King had taken into his hands all the lands of which they had died seised, and had afterwards assigned to each heir her purparty as she came of age, and that in the assignment made of the manor of Northbury to Ralph and Matilda no mention had been made of the advowson, and she appealed to the Rolls of the Chancery. A day was given to the parties on the morrow of the Ascension to enable scrutiny of the Rolls to be made. A postscript states that an examination of the Rolls showed that the manor of Northbury together with all the lands, tenements, fees, and advowsons of which Philip and Joan had died seised, had been taken into the King's hands after their deaths, and that when the manor of Northbury was assigned by the King in purparty to Matilda, no mention was made of the advowson. It therefore appeared to the Court that the presentation at present rather belonged to the King than to the said Joan or Ralph and Matilda, because the King had retained the advowson in his hands. The suit was therefore dismissed. m. 17.

Staff. Ralph de Kerswall and Margaret his wife recover the third part of a messuage and bovate of land in Fenton-Culverd, as dower of Margaret, against Adam son of William le Tannur of Newcastle-under-Lyme, and Eva his wife, by default of the defendants. m. 42.

Staff. Ermegarda formerly wife of Henry de St. Maur sued William de Mortimer and Alianora his wife for the third of a messuage and carucate of land in Fleteleye and Legh, which she claimed as dower. And they had made default, and the dower claimed had been taken into the King's hand, and they had been re-summoned for this date. And William did not appear, but Alianora came and stated that the tenements were her right, and prayed she might be admitted to defend them; and she appeared in Court before judgment had been rendered. She is therefore admitted by the Statute, and she called to warranty Philip son of Philip de Chetewynd, who is to be summoned for the morrow of St. John the Baptist. m. 42.

Staff. Hawyse formerly wife of Reginald de Sadintone sued Nicholas super le Hull of Bromley Abbot for a third of a carucate of land and 7s. 6d. of rent and half a messuage in Blythebury as her dower.

Nicholas stated he claimed only for a term by a demise of the said Reginald, and called to warranty Roger son and heir of Reginald, who is under age and in ward with a part of his land to Thomas le Brabazun the parson of the Church of Hungerton, and another part of whose land is in the custody of Roger le Brabazun, and another part in custody of the said Hawyse; and he produced a deed which showed that Reginald had demised to him all his tenements in Blyebyri for a term of twenty years. Adjourned to Michaelmas term. m. 57.

Staff. John Jacob, the essoignor of Agnes formerly wife of John de Pendeford, appeared against Thomas de la Hyde in a plea respecting the third of an acre of land and two acres of pasture in Pendeford; and against Ralph de Bisshebury, the custos of the land and heir of Robert Purcel, in a plea respecting the third of fourteen acres of land in Bisshebury which she claimed as dower. The defendants did not appear, and the Sheriff is ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand and summon them again for the Octaves of St. John the Baptist. m. 77.

Staff. The Abbot of Salop and Alan Plukenet were summoned by Ralph le Botiler and Matilda his wife in a plea that they should permit them to present a fit person to the Church of Northbury, which was vacant, etc. And they stated that Philip Marmiun and Joan his wife, the mother of Matilda, of whom she is one of the heirs, by right of Joan had presented to the Church one William de Berkeley, their clerk, in the reign of King Henry the King's father, and who had been admitted and instituted. And from Joan the right of presentation descended to one Joan and to the said Matilda and to Mazera as daughters and heirs, and from Mazera the right of her purparty descended to one Joan as daughter and heir. And the manor of Northbury, to which the advowson of the Church is appurtenant, after the death of the said Philip and Joan his wife, was assigned to Matilda in purparty of the inheritance of the said Joan her mother. And they complained that whereas the right of presentation belonged to them, the defendants unjustly impeded them, for which they claimed £40 as damages.

And the Abbot and Alan defended their rights, and the Abbot stated that one Hugh de Kingeston the predecessor of the Abbot in the reign of King John the King's grandfather, had presented to the Church one William de Northbury his clerk, who had been admitted and instituted; and afterwards one Henry de Leya his predecessor had presented to the same Church one Hugh Pipard in the reign of King Henry the King's father; And the same Henry had also presented one William de Vyene to the Church; and afterwards William de Upton, formerly Abbot, had presented in the reign of King Henry to the same Church one Philip de Pyulesdon his clerk, and who had died the last parson of it; and he appealed to a jury. The Sheriff is ordered to summon a jury for the Octaves of Trinity.

And Alan stated that the manor of Northbury together with the manors of Kylpek and Purlebache (Pulverbach) were formerly in the seisin of one Hugh de Kilpek. And after his death the manor of Kilpek was assigned in purparty to Isabella the eldest daughter and heir of Hugh, who married William Walraund. And the other two manors of Northbury and Purlebache were assigned to Joan the other daughter and heir of Hugh, who married Philip Marmioun; and as the manors of Northbury and Purlebach exceeded in value the manor of Kylpek, the advowson of the Church was assigned to Isabella in purparty; and he stated that he was in seisin of the manor of Kilpek to which the advowson belongs; and for that reason he had rightly impeded the plaintiffs, and he had conceded the presentation for this time to the lord the King, saving his right, etc. m. 128.

Warr. Nicholas son of Nicholas le Archer had elsewhere sued Margaret la Russe for a messuage and two carucates of land excepting two virgates in Caldecote by writ of entry before the Justices Itinerant in the county in the thirteenth year of the King's reign. And the suit had remained sine die because the King had moved the record and process coram Rege. And the King now remitted the record and process to this Court; and Margaret had been summoned by a writ de resumonitione. And Nicholas and Margaret now appeared, and Margaret prayed that the writ might be read; and it appeared by it that the suit had been made a remanet in the fourteenth year of the King's reign and not in the thirteenth as pleaded. The present suit is therefore dismissed, Nicholas to take out another writ if he pleased. (fn. 3) m. 132.

Staff. An assize of last presentation to the Church of Northbury, the advowson of which appertained to the King by the idiotcy of John Walraund, who was in ward to the King and of which advowson the Abbot of Salop had deforced the King. Nicholas de Warewyk the King's attorney stated that William Walraund and Isabel his wife the ancestors of the said John, had presented to the Church in the reign of King Henry the King's father, one John Walraund their clerk, who had been admitted and instituted; and upon his resignation the said William and Isabella had presented to the Church William de Berkele their clerk, who had been admitted and instituted, and died the last parson of the Church; and from Isabella the right descended to one Robert son and heir; and from Robert to John as brother and heir. The Abbot defended his right and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for Trinity Term. A postcript states that the Abbot afterwards conceded to the King the right of presentation hac vice, saving his rights, etc. m. 128, dorso.

Staff. In another suit respecting the same advowson, Joan de Mortein conceded to the King the right of presentation hac vice, saving her rights, etc. m. 128, dorso.

Staff. Alan de Plukenet in the same way conceded to the King his right of presentation hac vice. m. 102, dorso.

Staff., Leyc. John de Flamstede who had been called to warranty by Hugh de Notingham, and who warranted to him, appeared against Amice formerly wife of Elyas de Flamstede in a plea that she should warrant to him the third part of a messuage and three virgates of land in Twycross in co. Leycester, which Isabella formerly wife of Thomas fitz Herbert claimed as dower. Amice did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to take into the King's hand, land belonging to her to the value of the claim and to summon her again for the Quindene of St. John the Baptist. m. 62, dorso.

Coram Rege Roll. Easter, 22 E. I.

Staff. The Sheriff had been ordered to raise 100s. from the lands and tenements of Philip brother of Richard de Prestwod, at Michaelmas, 19 E. I., adjudicated against him for a trespass committed against John de Salteley, and he returned that Philip could not be found and held nothing within his bailiwick. The Sheriff is therefore ordered to arrest him. m. 43.

Staff. In the suit of Quo warranto against the Abbot of Deulacres, the Abbot claiming infangenthef, gallows, wayf, and view of frankpledge, fair, market, and warren in Leek. The Abbot stated that King John had granted to Ralph Earl of Chester and his heirs a weekly market and a yearly fair in the said manor, and he produced the King's charter; and as regards the other franchises he stated that the same Earl had granted to the Abbot and Convent of Deuleucres the whole of the said manor, with the above liberties, in free and perpetual alms, and King Henry had ratified the gift; and similarly the present King had conceded the said manor to the convent and monks, and he produced the said King's charters.

Hugh de Louthre, who sued for the King, stated that the Abbot claimed the above liberties of the gift of Earl Ralph, who held no royal dignity, nor was he Earl Palatine, so that he could confer franchises which are annexed to the Crown. The suit was adjourned to the morrow of the Ascension. A postscript shows a further adjournment to Trinity term. m. 44.

Staff. John de la Wade sued Richard de Bisshopeston and Nicholas le Wodeman for cutting down his trees growing at Fetherstone to the value of £20; and they did not appear, and the Sheriff was ordered to attach them, and he returned that the said Nicholas was dead, and that Richard was a clericus and held no lay fee, and it was testified in Court by the said John that Richard held two carucates of land in the county of Stafford, and that he was the nephew (nepos (fn. 4) ) of the Sheriff. The Sheriff is therefore in misericordiâ for a false return, and he is ordered to attach the said Richard for the Quindene of St. John the Baptist. m. 47, dorso.

Staff. A day was given to Robert de Gresbrok plaintiff, and to Roger de Legh and Philip de Draycote in a plea of land at the Quindene of St. John the Baptist, at which day it was testified by Thomas de Assheburn that he (Philip) had died. The same Robert had sued Richard de Sandbach in the same plea, and he did not appear; and the Sheriff was ordered to summon Richard to show cause, etc., and he returned he had summoned him by Thomas atte Mere of Neubolt, and Henry atte Bernes of the same, and he did not appear. Adjourned to the said term. m. 44, dorso.

Staff. In the suit of Quo warranto against Walter Deverous, and Richard de Marnham and Margaret his wife, his coparceners, respecting franchises claimed by them in Bromwych (West Bromwich). Richard and Margaret appeared and stated they claimed no pleas of the Crown excepting view of frankpledge, infangenthef, gallows, and wayf, and that their ancestors had held them from time out of memory, and they appealed to a jury, which found in their favour.

The King's attorney stated that wayf was a grossum annexed to the Crown, and could not be separated from it without special warrant, and he prayed for judgment on that point. The Sheriff is ordered to summon a jury of twenty-four for the Octaves of St. John the Baptist. Richard and Margaret renounced any claim to free warren. m. 43, dorso.

Staff. Emma daughter of William le Lorimer of Lemynstre had appealed coram Rege at Michaelmas, 18 E. I., William de Sallowe, Succentor of the Church of St. Cedde of Lychfeld for rape and breach of the King's peace at Michaelmas, 18 E. I., and afterwards at the Octaves of the Purification, beyond which day the suit was not continued; and the Sheriff was ordered to produce the said William to answer to the King for the same; and William now appeared and pleaded he was a clericus; and saving his clerical privilege he put himself on the country. The Sheriff is therefore ordered to summon a jury for the Quindene of Trinity, unless R. Brabanzon (the Justice) first, etc., (came into those parts); and Richard de Fulschawe, John Banastre, William le Levere of co. Lancastre, Thomas de Assheburne of co. Derby, John Bardulf of co. Leicester, and Henry de Mancestre of co. Warwick, stood bail to produce the said William at the above term, and until the end of the plea. m. 37, dorso.

Staff. The suit of the King versus John de Narwedale for the death of Roger de Narwedale is respited till the Octaves of Trinity, through defect of a jury. The Sheriff was ordered to produce at the same term the jury of twentyfour which he first put into the panel, and besides these the twelve honest and legal men whom Cecilia formerly wife of the said Roger, who sued for the King, had named on behalf of the King. And as the Sheriff sent the names of the jury on the panel without attachment, he is in misericordiâ. m. 9, dorso.

Coram Rege Roll. Trinity, 22 E. I.

Staff. In the suit of Quo warranto of the King versus Nicholas de Aldithele, the claim of Nicholas to free warren in Endon, Aldithele, Bettele, Tunstal, Chesterton, Horton, and Alstanefeld, is allowed, Nicholas having produced a charter of King Henry granting free warren to his ancestor James de Aldithele in those manors; and he claimed view of frankpledge, amends of the assize of bread and beer, and infangenthef in Enedon, Aldithele, and Bettele by prescription, and appealed to a jury, and the jury stated that Nicholas and his ancestors had held those franchises in those manors before the time of King Richard. They are therefore allowed; and as regards the manor of Horton, he claimed view of frankpledge, amends of the assize of bread and beer, and infangenthef, and stated that the manor had formerly been in the seisin of one Henry (sic, Hervey) de Stafford, who in his time held them, and that in the seventeenth year of King Henry a fine was levied between Henry de Aldithele his ancestor, and the said Hervey, by which Hervey acknowledged the said manor to be the right of the said Henry, and for which Henry gave him certain other tenements, and he produced the fine, and he called to warranty Edmund son of Nicholas de Stafford, the heir of the said Hervey, who is under age; and Hugh de Louthre the King's attorney objected, stating that the liberties in question belonged to the Crown, and did not appertain to a tenement, and there was no express mention of them in the fine; and he also pleaded that the said Hervey never possessed the franchises in that manor, and appealed to a jury; which found that Hervey possessed those franchises during his time. The suit is therefore to remain till the heir comes of age; and as regards the manor of Tunstall, Nicholas stated he claimed view of frankpledge, assize of bread and beer, and wayf, and that Engenulf de Grasele and Elena his wife, whose right the manor was formerly, gave it to one Adam de Aldithele his ancestor, and Engenulph and Elena from time out of memory had held those liberties in that manor, and he appealed to a jury, which found in his favour. And as regards the manor of Bettelegh, he stated he claimed to have in it a fair and market by a charter of King Henry, which he produced, and which testified that the King had given to Henry de Aldithele his ancestor that he and his heirs should have in perpetuity a weekly market on Thursdays, and a fair of three days on the Vigil, the Feast, and the morrow of St. Margaret in the manor of Bettelegh. These franchises are therefore allowed to him. And as regards the manor of Chesterton, he stated that Ela formerly wife of James de Audele held it in dower, and that he claimed none of the above franchises in the manors of Chesterton and Alstanesfeld; and as regards "wayf," the King's attorney pleaded it was a grossum de coronâ, which could not be separated from the Crown without a special grant from the King; and a day was given to the parties to hear judgment on this point on the morrow of the Ascension, and which was adjourned from term to term till the Octaves of Trinity in this year, when Nicholas did not appear, and it was adjudged to the King by his default. A postscript states that afterwards, in the Octaves of St. Michael, 22 E. I., the King sent a writ stating that whereas he understood from the said Nicholas that the King had recovered the franchise of wayf against the said Nicholas in his manors of Enedon, Tunstal, Alditheleie, Horton, Chesterton, Betteleie, and Alstanefeld, through default of appearance of Nicholas, whilst he was in the service of Edmund the King's brother in Gascony, he was to be put into the same position as regards the question as before his default. The Sheriff was therefore ordered to put Nicholas again into seisin of the said liberty of wayf, saving the King's rights, etc. m. 19, dorso.

Banco Roll. Trinity, 22 E. I.

Derb., Staff. Agnes formerly wife of Ralph de Burgo sued William Gryffyn and Alianora the daughter of Henry de Verdun, for a third of a messuage and three virgates of land and nine acres of meadow in Waltonupon-Trent as her dower. William and Alianora called to warranty John Gryffin and Alice his wife, Robert son of William le Lord, William son of Robert de Cavereswell and Joan his wife, and Robert son of Nicholas de Fynderne, who are to be summoned for the Octaves of Michaelmas; the first five to be summoned in Staffordshire, and Robert son of Nicholas in Derbyshire. A postscript states that on the day named, the Sheriff sent no writ, and was ordered to summon them for the morrow of All Souls. m. 4.

Staff. A jury returned a verdict that a messuage and seven acres and a half of land in Wednesbury were the free alms of the Church of Nicholas de Burton the parson of Wednesbury, and not the lay fee of Philip Bonde of Bromewych, who held the tenement, and that it had been alienated by Nicholas the Abbot of Hales. Nicholas the parson is therefore to recover seisin of it. m.

Staff. Thomas the Prior of Sondwell (Sandwell) sued Nicholas Comitassone of Grete, for a mill and half an acre of land in West Bromwych and Tybenton (Tipton) as the right of his Church; and Nicholas did not appear, etc. A postscript states a jury came at Trinity term, 24 E. I., (fn. 5) and stated that there was no collusion between the Prior and the said Nicholas, and as regards the mill, that a certain William fitz Guy, the lord of Bromwyz, gave the mill at a time out of memory to the predecessor of the said Prior, and that one Geoffrey fitz Warin, the lord of Stybinton (sic, Tybenton), in the reign of King Henry the King's father, gave the half acre in question to one Richard de la Barre the Prior of Sandwell, and that the said Richard was seised of it as of the right of his Church before the date of the Statute (of Mortmain). It is therefore considered that the Prior should recover seisin. m. 36.

Staff. Henry de Wednesfeld was summoned by William de Boweles for causing waste and destruction in a wood he held for a term of ten years in Russhale, and he complained that Henry had pulled down a house worth 20s., and cut down forty ash trees each worth 3d., and ten pear trees each worth 2d., for which he claimed 100s. as damages. Henry appeared and demurred to the writ because he held the tenement by a demise made by William de Boweles the son of the plaintiff, and not from William the father, and appealed to a jury. The Sheriff was ordered to summon a jury for the Octaves of St. Martin. A postscript shows no jury had been assembled up to Trinity term, 23 E. I. m. 58.

Staff. John Basset and Roger de Weston, the executors of the will of Ralph Basset, formerly parson of Draycote, sued William de Talk for 4 marks. William did not appear, and is to be attached for the morrow of All Souls. m. 75.

Derb. John son of Henry de Chaundos sued Joan formerly wife of Richard de Harecurt for six messuages, six bovates of land, and the fourth part of a mill in Eginton, of which Margaret daughter of Robert Wakelyn (sic, fitz Walcheline), the grandmother of John, was seised in demesne as of fee when she died. Joan appeared and stated that one John de Chaundos formerly held the tenements in dispute by the courtesy of England, of the inheritance of John son and heir of the said Margaret, and who was formerly husband of the same Joan, and by virtue of his seisin gave the said tenements to the said John the son (de seisinâ suâ reddidit predicta tenementa predicto Johanni filio, etc.), so that the said tenements after the decease of John the son should remain to the said Joan for her life in the name of dower, after which surrender (redditionem) the said John formerly husband of Joan, whose heir the said John son of Henry is, was seised of the said tenements, and she stated she claimed nothing in them except for her life.

John son of Henry acknowledged the tenements were formerly in seisin of the said John de Chaundos, but he pleaded that the said John formerly husband of Joan was at that time under age and in ward to the said John de Chaundos, and died whilst under age; and he denied that either John formerly husband of Joan nor the said Joan during the lifetime of John her husband were ever in seisin of the said tenements by any gift of the said John de Chaundos, and he appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the Quindene of St. Martin. m. 124.

Staff. Joan formerly wife of William de Caverswalle and William de la Donne appeared against Henry de Cavereswalle Levedale (sic) in a plea that he had taken fish vi et armis from the free fishery of the said Joan and William at Levedale and Donne. Henry did not appear, and is to be attached for the Quindene of St. Martin. m. 156.

Staff. Willelmus Bagod et Robertus Bagod filii domini Willielmi Bagot senioris, dedimus, etc., Herveo Bagod avunculo nostro totum messuagium nostrum de la Wodeton, cum totâ terrâ arabili, etc. Pro hac autem donatione, etc., dedit nobis et concessit Herveus Bagod totum jus suum quod habuit in villâ de Mourton Bagod, etc. m. 162.

Staff. Pateat, etc., ego Herveus Bagod certus fido de sex marcis et dimidiâ argenti annualis redditûs ad terminum vitæ meæ percipiendis in manerio de Pattleshull circa festum Sancti Michalis anno R. R. E. xxii., per Willelmum et Robertum filios Domini Willelmi Bagod volo et concedo ex meâ merâ voluntate quod predicti Willelmus et Robertus habeant totum messuagium de la Wodeton, etc., quod quidem messuagium habui de traditione eorundem, et quod carta et seisina nullius valoris poterint de cetero . . . clamavi, etc. m. 162.

Staff. Universis, etc., Willelmus Bagod, Robertus Bagod, filii Domini Willelmi Bagod, salutem, etc. Noverit universitas vestra nos unanimi concensu dedisse, etc., et ad terminum vitæ dimississe Herveo Bagod avunculo nostro centum solidos argenti annualis redditûs percipiendos de hominibus de Coppenhale nativis nostris scilicet de Ricardo en le Lono de Coppenhale, de Veviano de eâdem, de Nicholao filio Mathei de eâdem, de Galfrido fratre ejus, de Thoma le Greys, de Adamo de Merston, Rogero de Wetenaker, de Roberto de Acton, de Johanne Drambel, etc. (seven more named). m. 163.

Staff. The essoignor of Alianora the wife of William de Mortimer appeared against Philip son of Philip de Chetewynde, in a plea that he should warrant to her the third part of a messuage and carucate of land in Fleteleye and Legh which Ermegarda formerly wife of Henry de St. Maur claimed as dower. Philip did not appear, and is to be summoned for the Quindene of Michaelmas. m. 147, dorso.

Derb. Joan formerly wife of William de Cavereswall sued Richard Foliot of Etewall for ten acres of land in Etewall, and she sued Nigel de les Breres for sixteen acres, and Alexander de Morton and Isabel his wife for eight acres of land in the same vill as her dower of the dotation of Robert son of Nicholas her first husband. The defendants prayed a view, and the case is adjourned to a month from Michaelmas. A postscript shows it was further adjourned till Hillary term. m. 141, dorso.

Staff. Agnes formerly wife of John de Pendeford recovers dower in Pendeford against Thomas de la Hyde, and in Bissebiri against Ralph de Bissebiri, the custos of the land and heir of Robert Purcel, through default of the defendants. m. 113, dorso.

Staff. Richard de Sonbach (Sandbach) was summoned in a plea by Adam de Mukleston that he should warrant to him six acres and a half of land in Legh, which he claimed to hold of him, and for which he holds his deed with a clause of warranty, and for which Robert de Stepelton and Matilda his wife had afterwards sued him before the Justices Itinerant in Staffordshire in 21 E. I., and which suit he had lost through his defect of warranty, and for which he claimed £20 as damages. Richard stated that Adam did not hold the tenement at the date of the writ, viz., 10th February, 21 E. I., and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the Octaves of St. Martin. m. 59, dorso.

Staff. William de Stretton and Alditha his wife not appearing to prosecute their suit against Hugh le Blund for twelve acres in Peyncrich (Penkridge), the case is dismissed. m. 27, dorso.

Banco Roll. Michaelmas, 22—23 E. I.

Staff. Richard de Lee, William de la Lowe of Fulford, and three others, were attached to answer William de Talk in a plea that they had carried off his corn from Folford (Fulford) vi et armis in the 19th year of the King's reign. Richard and the other defendants denied the trespass, and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 4.

Staff. The suit between the King and John Husee, whom Hugh le Blund had called to warranty respecting land in Penkryz, is to remain sine die. m. 4.

Derb., Staff. In the suit of Margaret formerly wife of John de Acovere versus Henry son of William fitz Herbert, for dower in Acovere (Okeover), Henry had called to warranty Roger the son and heir of John, who was in ward to William de Montgomeri; and William now appeared and prayed it might be shown why he should warrant the dower; and Henry stated that John de Acovere had given the said tenements to him with a clause of warranty, and he produced the deed. William stated that Henry never was in seisin of the tenements by any gift of the said John, because John had died seised of them, and he appealed to a jury. The Sheriff is ordered to summon a jury for the Quindene of St. Martin. m. 25.

Staff. Thomas the Abbot of Burton-on-Trent, Brother Hugh le Ousyver, and John le Serjant were attached to answer the plea of Henry son of William fitz Herbert, that against the Statute and custom and law of the kingdom, they had taken from a place called Pyncheneye in Acovere, sixteen oxen of the plough belonging to him, and had impounded them. The defendants admitted they had taken six oxen, and stated that a certain John de Acovere held of the Abbot the vills of Acovere and Ile (sic) (Ilam), and half the vill of Castel (Casterne) by homage and fealty, and the service of two marks annually; and that two marks were owing for relief after the death of the said John, for which the Abbot had distrained Roger the son and heir of John, and they appealed to a jury. And Henry stated that the Abbot could have found sufficient distress within the fee without taking cattle from the plough, and appealed to a jury on this point. The Sheriff is ordered to summon a jury for the Octaves of Hillary. m. 27.

Staff. Geoffrey de Skeftyngton sued Nicholas de Audele to warrant to him four messuages and fifty-four acres of land in Bredeshale, which Richard de Curzun claimed. Nicholas did not appear, and Richard de Weston came into court and produced the King's letters of protection, to last so long as the said Nicholas was away in the King's service. The suit is therefore to remain sine die. m. 33.

Staff. Henry de Egebaston and William his son appeared against John de Eton and Joan his wife in a plea that they should warrant to them half of two parts of the manor of Himeleye and half of five acres of land in Seggeleye which they hold and claimed to hold of them, and for which they have their deed. John and Joan did not appear, and the Sheriff is ordered to distrain and produce them at the Quindene of Hillary. (fn. 6) m. 73.

Staff. Alice formerly wife of Philip de Draycote sued Philip son of Philip de Draycote for a third of a messuage, fifty acres of land, ten acres of meadow, sixty acres of wood, forty acres of pasture, and £10 of rent in Legh; and she sued William de Paunton for a third of a rent of a pound of pepper in the same vill; and she sued Roger the son of Philip de Draycote for a third of a messuage and a carucate of land and 40s. of rent in the same vill as dower. Philip, as regards the dower claimed against him, called to warranty Richard son of Philip de Draycote; and William and Robert called to warranty Philip son of Philip de Draycote. Adjourned to the Quindene of Hillary. m. 93.

Staff. The suit of Ralph Pypard versus Theobald de Verdun is to remain sine die, Theobald having letters of protection whilst in Gascony on the King's service. m. 144.

Staff. William Griffyn and Alianora the daughter of Henry de Verdun, appeared against John Griffyn and Alice his wife, Robert son of William le Lord, William son of Robert de Caverswell and Joan his wife, and Robert son of Nicholas de Fynderne in a plea that they should warrant to them the third part of a messuage and three virgates of land and nine acres of pasture in Walton-upon-Trent in co. Derby, which Agnes formerly wife of Ralph de Burgo claimed as dower. Adjourned to the Octaves of Hillary. m. 145.

Staff. In the suit of Robert de Somerford versus Walter son of Thomas Mazebrayn of Engelton for a messuage and a virgate of land in Engelton, excepting three acres, Walter took exception to the writ, because one John de Engelton held a part of the land claimed, viz., half an acre. As Robert could not deny this, the writ was withdrawn. m. 157.

Staff. Richard de Goldesburgh and Alesia his wife, and Edmund de Percy and Joan his wife, by their custos, sued John Doyly for a messuage, two carucates and fourteen and a half virgates of land, four acres of meadow and twenty acres of wood in Ronton, Mulnemes (Milmees), and Little Wyrley, of which Roes Doyly the grandmother of Alesia and Joan, whose heirs they are, was in seisin when she died. John appeared and stated that in the Octaves of St. Martin in the 6th year of the King's reign, a fine was levied between the said John and Roes respecting the said tenements, by which fine Roes acknowledged the said tenements to be the right of John as of the gift of Roes, and for which John conceded them to Roes for her life, and by the above fine John was in seisin of the tenements during the life of Roes for two years, and he appealed to a jury.

And Richard and the other plaintiffs stated that Roes after the date of the said fine had continued in seisin of the tenements and died seised of them, and they appealed to a jury. And the Sheriff was ordered to summon a jury for three weeks from Easter. A postscript states that after several adjournments through defects of juries, the parties appeared on the morrow of St. John the Baptist at York, in the 27th year of the King's reign, and John Doyly then pleaded that a jury ought not to be summoned to try the above issue, because the Statute stated that fines should not be brought into question by the verdict of juries in this form, and he produced the fine and prayed judgment if any one could claim any right in the tenements against the tenor of it. And the King by his mandate to the Justices commanded that no inquisition should be made, nor anything attempted against the Statute; and Richard and the other plaintiffs being asked if they knew aught against the said fine, stated that they appealed to a jury as before. And as the lord the King, after the parties had put themselves on a jury, had made a statute that fines levied in his courts should not be enervated by exceptions of this nature, (fn. 7) nor inquisitions taken respecting the same, it appeared to the court that the trial could not proceed on the above issue. The suit is therefore dismissed; and Richard and the other plaintiffs are in misericordiâ for a false claim. The fine of Edmund de Percy is remitted because he is under age. m. 174.

Staff. William de Chatculne and Alice his wife, and Roger de Newport and Edelina his wife, sued Henry Schelde and Petronilla the daughter of William Gilbert for two messuages in Stafford. The defendants did not appear, and a day had been given to them by their essoignors after appearance in court. The Sheriff is therefore to take the tenements into the King's hands, and summon them for three weeks from Easter. m. 174.

Derb. John son of Henry de Chaundos and Robert de Stafford appeared against Henry son of William le fitz Herbert and Margaret his daughter (sic) in a plea that they had deforced Roger son and heir of John de Acoure (Okeover), whose wardship pertained to them, inasmuch as John de Acoure held his land of them by knight's service. The defendants did not appear, and are to be attached for five weeks from Easter. m. 240.

Staff. Geoffrey de Camvill appeared against Richard de Vernun in a plea that he should be present in court to hear the record and judgment in a suit which was before the Justices last Itinerant at Stafford between the said Geoffrey plaintiff, and the said Richard, tenant of one and a half acres of meadow in Clifton Camville which Geoffrey claimed as his right, and which was heard before the said Justices in 21 E. I., and remained over, because the said Richard was in prison; and he is now out of prison, and the Justices sent the record in these words, &c. (Here follows the record as in 21 E. I.) Richard did not appear, and the Sheriff is ordered to take the tenement into the King's hand, and summon him for the morrow of the Purification. m. 282, dorso.

Staff. John son of Henry de Casterne sued John de Knotton for a messuage in Newcastle-under-Lyme, in which John de Knotton had no entry except by a demise which Henry de Casterne his father had made to one Elyas le Ironmongere for a term which had expired. John de Knotton took exception to the writ, because he was jointly enfeoffed of the messuage with Alota his wife, who was not named in it, and John de Casterne withdrew his suit. m. 122, dorso.

Staff. Alice formerly wife of Philip de Draycote sued Alice daughter of Richard atte Touneshend and Matilda and Mabel her sisters for a third of five acres in Draycote, and she sued Elias de Streteford and Strangia his wife for a third of twenty-two acres in the same vill; and she sued Thomas de Combrugge for a third of four bovates of land in Calton; and Margaret formerly wife of Richard de Holeys for a third of a messuage and thirty-three acres of land in Kyngesleye; and she sued William son of Henry for a third of six and a half acres of land in the same vill; and she sued Richard de Whytemore and fourteen other tenants for a third of their holdings in the same vill; and she sued Richard son of Isolda and eight other tenants for a third of their holdings in Whiston; and she sued Richard Sitle for a third of 12d. rent in Werslowe, and Benedict de Buterdon for a third of a messuage and a bovate of land in Butterdon; and she sued Nicholas the Vicar of the Church of Bromley Abbots for a third of twelve acres of land and 2s. 6d. rent in Legh; and William de Ferrars for a third of 16s. of rent, and fourteen other tenants for a third of their holdings in the same vill as her dower. None of the defendants appeared, and the Sheriff is ordered to take the dower claimed into the King's hand, and summon them for the Quindene of Hillary. m. 97, dorso.

Staff. Alice formerly wife of Philip de Draycote sued William Phelip of Tene for a third of four acres of land in Draycote, and Thomas le Clerk for a third of five acres in the same vill; and she sued William Pilke of Middelton and Alice his wife for a third of a messuage and sixteen acres of land; and Adam de Frodeswell for a third of twenty acres ; and Richard Ilberd for a third of twenty acres; and William son of Philip de Draycote for a third of a messuage and sixty-seven acres; and Richard de Cressewelle for a third of a messuage, four bovates, and fifteen acres of land, and four and a half acres of meadow, and ten acres of pasture in the same vill; and she sued William Wyther for a third of a messuage and six bovates of land in the same vill and in Calton, as her dower. The defendants appeared and prayed a view. And Adam and Richard called to warranty the said William son of Philip de Draycote, who was present and warranted their holdings to them, and likewise the holdings of the other defendants. And William Wyther called to warranty Richard de Draycote, who is to be summoned for the Quindene of Hillary. m. 91, dorso.

Staff. William son of Peter Corbysun sued John Gyffard of Chilinton for the manor of Chilinton excepting fifteen messuages, a hundred acres, and a virgate and a half of land, by open writ of right, and stated that Margaret his ancestor was seised of it in the reign of King Richard, etc. (as before); and John appealed to a Great Assize, and offered half a mark to have mention of the time; and a day was given to them on the Octaves of the Purification when four Knights are to come (to name a jury). A postscript adds that on the Octaves of St. Martin, 23 E. I., the parties appeared, and likewise John Doyley, John de Heronville, John fitz Philip, and Robert de Knygtelegh, four Knights summoned to elect, etc., and they elected these, viz., William Trussel, Robert de Dutton, Adam de Brunton, Ralph le Botiler, Thomas Corbet, John de Wasteneys, Robert de Bromley, William Trumwyne, Robert de Pype, Robert de Verdun, Richard de Vernoun, Henry de Eggelaston sic (Edgbaston), John de Oyly, John fitz Philip of Bobinton, John de Herunville, and Robert de Knytelegh. The Sheriff is ordered to summon them for a month from Easter. m. 75, dorso.

Staff. Walter de Beisin sued Robert Beysin for two parts of a messuage and carucate of land, three acres of meadow, and 10s. of rent in Shuston (Shushions), of which Adam de Beysin his great grandfather, whose heir he is, had been seised as of fee when he died. Robert denied that the said Adam had died seised of the tenements, because before his death he had given the land to one Warine de Besin, and he appealed to a jury; and the Sheriff was ordered to summon a jury for the Quindene of Hillary. A postscript states that a jury appeared on the Quindene of Trinity, 25 E. I., who stated that Adam had died seised of the tenements in demesne as of fee. It is therefore considered that Walter should recover seisin, and his damages are taxed by the jury at £7 8s.

Staff. Richard son of Hervey de Stretton sued Adam Henry and Cecilia his wife, and William son of Henry, for half a virgate and four acres of wood in Stretton; and he sued Robert le Champyun and Agnes his wife for half a virgate in the same vill; and Richard Teveray for four acres in Doneston (Dunston), of which Richard de Stretton his grandfather, whose heir he is, was seised as of fee when he died. Robert le Champyun and Agnes his wife called to warranty William le Champyun, who is to be summoned for the Quindene of Hillary. Richard Tyveray stated that the said Richard de Stretton did not die seised of the tenement claimed against him, and appealed to a jury, which is to be summoned for the same date.

The same Richard son of Hervey sued Joan formerly wife of William de Cavereswelle for 10s. of rent in la Doune near Bradelegh. Joan appeared and demurred to the writ because she was enfeoffed conjointly with one Alianora the daughter of William de Caverswell; and as Richard could not deny this, he withdrew his writ. m. 38, dorso.

Staff. Matilda formerly wife of William de Declyng recovers dower in a messuage and twenty-four acres of land, seven acres of meadow, and four acres of moor in Ruleye (Rowley Regis), held by Edith de Tokenhale, formerly wife of Philip de Tokenhale. m. 30, dorso.

Staff. Thomas Meverel of Gayton was summoned by Thomas de Ferrars in a plea that he should render a reasonable account for the time he was his bailiff in Certeleye (Chartley), Ambriton, (Amerton), Grenlegh, Merebroc, and Weston (Weston-on-Trent); and he stated that Thomas Meverel had been his bailiff from the Feast of the Purification, 7 E. I., until the Feast of the Apostles Philip and James, 21 E. I., in the said vills, from which the rent was £15 from free tenants and villains, and other perquisites, and he had been unable to obtain from him any account whatever. Thomas Meverel appeared and denied he had ever been bailiff in the said vills.

Thomas de Ferrars stated that Robert be Ferrars his father had given to him the said rent, and had appointed the said Thomas Meverel custos, and to answer to him (Thomas) for the profits, because he was under age, and that Thomas Meverel had received the profits of the manors for the whole of the above time, and without rendering any account for the same, and in that way he was acting as his bailiff, and he appealed to a jury, and Thomas Meverel likewise. The Sheriff was ordered to summon a jury for the Quindene of Hillary. A postscript states that on the morrow of the Purification, 25 E. I., Thomas de Ferers appeared by his custos, and Thomas Meverel acknowledged that he was his bailiff in the said vills, and consented to render an account, and auditors were assigned by the Court, before whom the said Thomas rendered an account, by which it appeared that he was in arrears to the said Thomas de Ferrars in the sum of £140 17s. 4d., and which he paid in Court to John de Brundish the custos of Thomas de Ferrars. m. 27, dorso.

Footnotes

1 No record of this suit appears on the Rolls of Michaelmas, 22 E. I.
2 The family of Rochford appear from the Rolls to have been considerable landowners at this date in the counties of Derby and Notts.
3 This Nicholas le Archer who claimed the manor of Caldicote, was of Sybertoft, co. Northampton. See proceedings in Banco, Easter, 23 E. 1. I find a Nicholas son of Nicholas l'Archer of Sybertoft, Knight, named in a Northamptonshire suit of 28 E. I.
4 "Nepos" is often used on the Rolls for grandson.
5 A verdict must have been delivered in favour of the Prior in the interim, and the subsequent proceedings grew out of the Statute of Mortmain of [..].
6 This suit was concluded by a fine in 23 E. I., by which Henry and Joan acknowledged the above tenements to be the right of Henry and William.
7 This was a new statute passed in 27 E. I., entitled "Statutum de finibus levatis."