Bracton: Thorne Edition: English. Volume 2, Page 152

Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Volume 2, Page 152

Next

Go to Volume: Page:

[001] under his care all his life [and] converted all the profits to his own use. When the
[002] father died the boy put himself into that land and the true heir at once ejected
[003] him; the boy did not recover because the father took the esplees all his life, and this
[004] despite the fact that the jurors said he did so for the care of his boy. And if the
[005] heir could not eject him at once he could recover by the assise of mortdancestor,
[006] as [in the roll] of Michaelmas term in the third and the beginning of the fourth years
[007] of king Henry.¹ And so if both donor and donee are in possession and the donor
[008] enfeoffs another, puts him in seisin and ejects the earlier feoffee, the latter will not
[009] recover by the assise of novel disseisin, as [in the roll] of Michaelmas term in the
[010] sixteenth and the beginning of the seventeenth years of king Henry in the county of
[011] Suffolk, [the case] of William of Fraxino.² Suppose that one gives half of his land
[012] to another in marriage with his daughter, a specific half or half generally, and all
[013] remain together in one house and on the same land, sharing their crop in common,
[014] and the donor dies so seised; the gift will not be valid, as [in the roll] of the last
[015] eyre of Martin of Pateshull in the county of Suffolk, an assise of novel disseisin
[016] [beginning] ‘if Anselmus.’³ To the same intent [in the roll] of the eyre of Simon of
[017] Pateshull in the counties of Leicester and Suffolk,⁴ where it is said that if the
[018] donor and donee are both in seisin throughout the donor's life, then, though the
[019] donee takes all the esplees and the homages and fealties of the tenants and though
[020] the donor publicly declares that the land is not his but the donee's and that he is a
[021] guest and has been taken in out of charity as a visitor, the gift will still not be valid
[022] because the donor continued his seisin. To the same intent [in the roll] of the last
[023] eyre of Martin of Pateshull in the county of Suffolk, [the case] of one John son of
[024] Hugh and Alan his older brother.⁵ The case is this: Alan in the lifetime of Hugh,
[025] his father, granted to John, his younger brother, by an agreement made between
[026] them, the entire inheritance which ought to descend to him from the aforesaid
[027] Hugh, their common father, and Hugh surrendered it in the court of the chief
[028] lord and the chief lord took the homage of the same John. But Alan then revoked.
[029] And Hugh, after he had put John in seisin, travelled through the country for two
[030] months and then returned and put himself into that land and was so in seisin with
[031] the aforesaid John for a year and a half and died so seised. And because he died
[032] so seised, and because Alan had so revoked, and because the grant was made of a
[033] thing that was not vacant, and made long before Hugh had surrendered it, the
[034] same John, after he had been ejected by Alan, did not recover his seisin by the
[035] assise. And to the same intent [in the roll] of the last eyre of Martin of Pateshull
[036] in the county of Lancaster, in the eleventh year of king Henry,⁶ where a jury
[037] was taken in Lincoln⁷ as to whether Roger

Notes

1. Not in B.N.B., supra 150

2. B.N.B., no. 871; C.R.R., xiv, no. 2222; William de Fraxineto was one of the four justices assigned to hear the assise

3. B.N.B., no. 1922; J.I. 1/819, m. 23; not marked or side-lined

4. B.N.B., i, 169

5. B.N.B., no. 1924; J.I. 1/819, m. 23d; not marked or side-lined

6. B.N.B., no. 1294; no roll extant

7. Ibid. A fuller record of the Lincs. portion is enrolled in J.I. 1/482, m. 7, the Lincoln eyre in which Br. was a justice: infra v.