Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 4, Page 309  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] between tenements or between rights, he does not acquire because he does not consent.
[002] But the decision on an exception of this kind is left to the discretion of the judge.

There is also an exception arising from the person of the demandant if he is naturally deaf and dumb.

[004] A peremptory exception arising from the person of the demandant also lies for the
[005] tenant because of a natural defect, as where one is born deaf and dumb, so that he
[006] cannot speak or hear at all, not if he is hard of hearing or his speech has a minor
[007] impediment.1 One naturally deaf and dumb cannot acquire because he cannot consent,
[008] because he is completely unable to hear the words of the stipulator, and since
[009] he cannot hear or speak at all, he cannot express his will and consent either by words
[010] or sings.2 ‘Naturally,’ I say, that is, from birth, as one speaks of a blind man who was
[011] blind from birth, for if this comes about accidentally, there must be an enquiry as
[012] to what he was like before the accident, because if at first he could speak and hear
[013] and consent [and] acquires, by himself or by a procurator, he retains what he had
[014] acquired, though he does not easily transfer it to another. But since one who is
[015] naturally deaf and dumb cannot acquire, his necessaries are to be found him as long
[016] as he lives by the judge acting ex officio, in accordance with his personal rank and the
[017] amount of his inheritance, if he ought to be the heir. If he has once acquired, by the
[018] authority of a curator, and is ejected, he will recover by the assise, like a minor.

An exception because of incurable disease, as in the case of a leper.

[020] A peremptory exception arising from the person of the demandant lies for the tenant
[021] because of the demandant's incurable disease and bodily deformity, as where he is a
[022] leper and so deformed that the sight of him cannot be endured,3 so that he is put
[023] outside the community of mankind;4 such a man cannot plead, nor claim an inheritance,
[024] as [in the roll] of Trinity term in the eleventh year of king Henry in the county
[025] of Hertford, [the case] of Agnes the widow of John of Westwide,5 claiming dower.
[026] A disease of this kind bars a demandant from suing, but a supervening disease does
[027] not take away an inheritance already held, only one to be held.

An exception is also given because of acknowledgment, where one acknowledged in court that he is a villein, whether he is free or bond.6

[029] A peremptory exception arising from the person of the demandant lies for the tenant
[030] because of the demandant's confession and acknowledgment, as where he has once
[031] acknowledged that he is a villein in the court of the lord king; though he is free, the
[032] exception


1. Supra ii, 52, 286, iv, 178

2. Ibid.

3. ‘sustineri’

4. Supra ii, 52, iv, 292

5. C.R.R., xiii, no. 247 (Hertford); not in B.N.B.

6. ‘sive liber sive servus,’ from line following

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