Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 3, Page 391  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    




A writ to the effect that he was never so seised that etc.


[002] ‘The king to the sheriff, greeting. We order you to cause to come before you and the
[003] keepers of the pleas of our crown in your full county court twelve free and lawful
[004] men of such a vicinage by whom the truth may best be known, and to enquire
[005] diligently by their oath whether B. the late husband of A. on the day he married
[006] the same A. or ever thereafter was so seised in his demesne as of fee of so much land
[007] with the appurtenances in such a vill that he could endow the aforesaid A. thereof
[008] or not, because both the aforesaid A. and C. of N., against whom the aforesaid A.
[009] claims a third part in dower, have put themselves on that jury. And the inquest
[010] which you hold thereon etc. (as above).’ And let the order of inquests be observed
[011] as above, according as it ought to be held before the justices or in the county court.1
[012] There may be many reasons why he could not endow her therewith, as where he
[013] was never in seisin, or if he was in seisin gave it to someone before he had married
[014] his wife, or held it only for life, or for a term as the property of another, or in wardship
[015] with one who was under age, or as the maritagium or inheritance of his first
[016] wife, or in villeinage as a villein. No one in such seisin may endow his wife, and hence
[017] a general inquest2 may be taken in the manner described, which includes all these
[018] species. But if in his narratio he descends to one in particular, and alleges the reason
[019] why such a one could not endow his wife, as where he held in villeinage, or as the
[020] maritagium of his first wife, or in wardship, or in some other way, as said above, then
[021] let mention of this particular be made in the form of the inquest, in this way, namely,
[022] ‘to recognize on their oath whether B., formerly the husband of A., on the day he
[023] married the same A. or ever thereafter, was so seised in his demesne as of fee of so
[024] much land with the appurtenances in such a vill that he could endow her thereof, or
[025] whether, before he married the same A., he gave that land to C. of N. and made him
[026] his charter thereof.’ Or thus, ‘whether B. formerly the husband of A., on the day he
[027] married the same A., held so much land so freely and in fee etc. that he could endow
[028] the same A. thereof, as she says, or held it in villeinage and as a villein, as C. alleges,
[029] against whom the aforesaid A. claims a third part in dower.’ Or in another way,
[030] ‘whether he held it as his right and in fee etc. or in wardship (or ‘as the right of his
[031] first wife,’ or ‘for a term of years’ or ‘for the term of his life only’) because both the
[032] aforesaid C.3 and A. have put themselves



Notes

1. Infra 392

2. ‘inquisitio’

3. ‘C’


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