Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 3, Page 231  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] to be before our justices on such a day to show why he does not do so. And have there
[002] the summoners etc.’. From this it is evident that the writ of quare impedit and that of
[003] quare non permittit amount to practically the same thing.1 If, after he has been summoned,
[004] he neither appears on the first day nor essoins himself, at one time, before
[005] the Lateran council, when time did not run against presentors, impediants were
[006] attached by pledges and by better pledges, and the whole solemn course of attachments
[007] was observed. Now, however, for good reason and of necessity, since what would
[008] otherwise not be lawful necessity makes so,2 we must proceed more speedily because
[009] of the shortness of time:3 let the impediant first be distrained in this way, either that
[010] the sheriff have his body, or that he distrain him by his lands and chattels ‘so
[011] that he may not put his hand [upon them],’4 in order to cause him to appear, as [in
[012] a case] of the eyre of William of Ralegh in the county of Bedford, [that] of Hubert of
[013] Vaux, at the beginning of the roll.5 This comes about not by judgment but by counsel
[014] of the court, in order to restrain the wrongdoing of those who wrongfully impede
[015] presentations that the time may run out. But if he who impedes the presentation is
[016] under age and has nothing by which he may be distrained, then let him be summoned
[017] in whose hand he is and by whose advice he is guided, that he be present on such a
[018] day and have him etc. by this writ.

If the impediant is under age.

[020] ‘The king to the sheriff, greeting. Summon etc. A. that he be before our justices etc.
[021] and that he have there B. who is under age and in his wardship, especially since he is
[022] governed by his counsel, as is said, to answer C. etc. (as below).’ 6 [Some believe that
[023] the patron is always to be summoned, not the clerk, since the clerk claims nothing
[024] in the advowson. But in truth we must see whether it is the clerk who impedes or the
[025] patron. For each of them may impede at his own time, that is, the patron before judgment,
[026] before he has lost his right to present, by presenting, and the clerk after judgment,
[027] after his patron has lost his right to present, by insisting after judgment on the
[028] presentation made of himself. Here the clerk must be summoned principally and the
[029] patron secondarily, that he be present to show what right he claims in the presentation
[030] which he once lost by judgment. If a patron who has lost by judgment, or when
[031] he has no right, presents to a church which is not vacant and causes the instituted
[032] clerk to be summoned to show why he impedes his presentation, the clerk may answer
[033] in the first place that


1. Infra 326

2. X.5.41, ca. 4

3. Infra iv, 377

4. Infra iv, 367

5. Not in B.N.B.

6. Belongs infra 232

Contact: specialc@law.harvard.edu
Page last reviewed April 2003.
© 2003 The President and Fellows of Harvard College