Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 4, Page 41  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] with the appurtenances in such a vill, which C. in our court etc. claims as his right
[002] against the aforesaid B., and if the same B. had no other entry in that land with the
[003] appurtenances other than by intruding himself in that land after the death of the
[004] aforesaid A. his father, to whom the aforesaid C. demised it for a term that has passed,
[005] as is said, because both the aforesaid C. etc.’ Let these suffice by way of example, because
[006] entries are infinite and the forms of writs infinite, and the forms of inquests are
[007] varied in many ways and very often, according to the differences in writs and answers,
[008] of all of which, since they are infinite, mention cannot be made.

Writ: if by a wife who had nothing except dower etc.

[010] If a wife aliens her dower and it is said in the writ of entry ‘in which such a one has no
[011] entry except through such a one, who was the wife of such a one, who demised that
[012] land to him, and who had nothing except dower therein by the gift of such a one her
[013] husband, after whose death the land ought to revert to such a one as to the warrantor
[014] of her dower,’1 if the tenant denies the entry through the wife and says that he has no
[015] entry through her but through such a one, the ancestor of the demandant, whose heir
[016] he is, who gave him that land by his charter, which he produces and which so testifies,
[017] if the replication is made by the other party that the charter ought not to be effective
[018] since it was made while the donor was of unsound mind, let it then be done as above,2
[019] because in a way he acknowledges the charter and gift, though it is invalid and to be
[020] nullified by law. If the charter is denied completely, or it is said that it ought not to be
[021] valid because he who is alleged to have given had no seisin of any kind, let the demandant
[022] then prove his allegation, if he can. But credit is not to be given to his simple
[023] assertion unless he has sufficient proof,3 [unless [one says] that credit is to be given
[024] him and his simple assertion with an examination of the reason.]4 If he has, let the
[025] tenant put himself on a jury by these words.5 But we must see whether he who gave
[026] was the heir and warrantor of the woman's dower or a stranger, for if he was not, the
[027] gift would not be good, but if he was it may be. For the heir may give what is his, that
[028] is, the proprietas, the right and the fee, and attorn the service to the donee so that the
[029] wife-tenant may have a free tenement as long as she lives. If she withdraws during
[030] her lifetime and renders her seisin to the donee, he does not therefore have his entry
[031] through her, but through the heir, though it would be otherwise if the gift were made
[032] only by the wife. For that reason let it be said


1. Supra 34-5

2. Supra 28

3. Supra 28

4. Supra 27, infra 217

5. Supra 28

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