Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 3, Page 277  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    




[001] except only the bare lordship. When he has thus transferred, livery having been
[002] made, [and] at once withdraws nude, so to speak, carrying nothing with him except
[003] the bare lordship, and the donee, livery having been made, is thus in vacant possession,
[004] finding nothing inconsistent with or derogatory to it, he at once has a free
[005] tenement, at that moment, as may clearly be seen. Suppose that the gift is made in
[006] the morning and the donee is in seisin to the hour of prime or tierce; the donor,
[007] livery having been made, withdraws, then regrets having made the gift and after
[008] the hour of tierce immediately returns wishing to enter; let him not be admitted;1
[009] if he offers violence, let him be repelled with force. If he seeks the assise, alleging that
[010] he was ejected wrongfully and without judgment, let the donee answer to the assise
[011] that he was not so ejected, because he freely gave, freely transferred and freely
[012] withdrew, and that no injuria was done him since he [once] wished it.2 It is evident
[013] therefore that the assise of novel disseisin ought to remain, despite any exception of
[014] tenuous seisin,3 since such exception ought not to lie in the face of the donor's own
[015] deed, though in some circumstances it lies on another's. Hence it appears that for
[016] the same reason that the assise falls in the person of the donor, it ought to be good and
[017] proceed for the donee, for recovering [seisin] if the donor ejects him without judgment
[018] under the same circumstances. Thus it follows from the foregoing that so short a
[019] time suffices for acquiring a free tenement, and that two may be seised as of fee on one
[020] and the same day and at different times. And what is said of two4 may be said of5
[021] several if, in the manner described, at some hour of the day they are in seisin and die6
[022] in seisin. Hence if the donor and donee, or the several donees, die on the day of the
[023] gift, [or] if the tenement is transferred successively by way of gift to several, from
[024] person to person, who die on the same day, [and] if the heirs of each claim the seisin
[025] of their ancestors against the chief lord by the assise, we must see which of them
[026] takes precedence. If it is said that it is the heir of the first donor, because his ancestor
[027] was in seisin at some hour of the day, the same may be said of the heir of the first
[028] donee and the second, because their ancestors were7 in seisin at some hour of the
[029] day, and so with respect to the others. To which it may be answered that in truth he
[030] ought to be preferred to the others whose ancestor was in seisin at some hour of the
[031] day and died seised. This may clearly be seen in the case of him whose ancestor was
[032] seised ‘[on the day] he undertook the pilgrimage upon which he died’8 because he
[033] may undertake the journey today and on the same day or on the morrow make a
[034] gift, and on the same day he sets out, or on the next die, and thus though he is seised
[035] at some hour of the day on which



Notes

1. Supra ii, 132, 151, 153-4

2. Supra ii, 132

3. Supra ii, 154

4. ‘de duobus’

5. ‘de’ for ‘vel’

6. ‘obicrint’

7. ‘antecessores eorum fuerint’

8. ‘seisitus fuit die quo iter peregrinationis arripuit in quo itinere obiit,’ as supra 250, 275


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