Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 4, Page 171  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] of a father who enjoined his son to be a witness if he should hear it disputed.1 Hence
[002] if one should speak of the time of king Henry the elder he could lose because of lack
[003] of proof. Mention is also made of the time of a certain king because if the ancestor
[004] was never in seisin in his time, though he was in the time of another, the demandant
[005] could lose because of the error, as though such ancestor had never been in seisin,
[006] [Hence when one puts himself on the grand assise after such error, he sometimes
[007] gives the tenant his property, for having made mention of a time.] or2 because such
[008] ancestor was not in existence in the time of such king, either because he had died
[009] earlier or was not yet born.

That the demandant may change his intentio in part.

[011] When mention is made of an improper time by error, the demandant who has
[012] erred may sometime change his intentio, correct the error, and speak of the time
[013] of another king, up to the litis contestatio, that is, until there has been a definite
[014] answer to his intentio and the tenant has put himself on the grand assise or made
[015] his defence by the duel; after that he may not.3 On this there is matter among the
[016] pleas that follow the king in the twenty-fourth year, [the case] of the lord king and
[017] William of St. John in the county of Southampton.4 It is not of much importance
[018] if a change in the intentio is made with respect to the amount of the esplees. [Nor if]
[019] mention is made of a time of peace for a time of war,5 as of the time of king John,
[020] because of the seisin of an ancestor acquired at such time it is not appropriate to speak,
[021] because after the war those who were6 disseised by the war, when they were disseised
[022] by force and wrongfully, recovered such seisin as they had at the beginning of the
[023] war,[‘By force and wrongfully,’ I say, because many are captured by the enemy in war
[024] and give their lands for their ransom: aid is not given such persons except by the
[025] action quod metus causa, if duress was present.] and there are many in war time who
[026] make gifts freely, without force or fear.7

That it is not enough to put forward his intentio and support it unless he offers to prove it.

[028] It does not suffice if the demandant puts forward his intentio and supports it unless
[029] he proves it.8 Thus let it be said at the conclusion of the supported intentio: ‘And


1. Infra 172

2. Om: ‘ideo . . . de tempore,’ a connective

3. Om: ‘cum facta . . . de tempore’

4. Not in B.N.B.

5. B.N.B., no. 412 (margin)

6. ‘fuerunt’

7. Supra iii, 213; om: ‘et talis . . . revocatur’

8. Infra 353

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