Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

moved to Westminster soon after its completion, and kept under seal in the Exchequer, till, in 1696, it was deposited in the chapter house.

Ancient writers are not agreed as to the derivation of the word 'Domesday:' It has been affirmed (a), and with apparent probability, to be a corruption of Dome-boc, which was the appellation given to Alfred's register or code of Saxon laws; but the word 'domesday' was frequently used, even so long back as the eleventh century, to denote a survey (b).

As there can be no appeal from domesday-book, and no averment made against it (c), so it has not inappositely been called liber judiciarius (d); and we have a further clue to the signification of the word 'Domesday,' in Sir Edward Coke's 4th Inst. (e), who in adverting to its uncontrollable truth and verity, says, "And therefore in that respect like the doome and judgement at Doomesday."

Domesday-book was frequently appealed to in ancient times, as will be seen by consulting several of the authorities already referred to (f).

In the case of Griffin v. Palmer (g), the issue was whether the manor of Bowden in Northamptonshire were ancient demesne or not; and the Court of Common Pleas awarded that the plaintiff 'habeat recordum libri de Domesday hic in Oct. Mich., &c., and on production of the book at the trial it appeared, that the manor of Bowden in Leicestershire was ancient demesne, but that Bowden in Northamptonshire

was not.

The like issue was taken in ejectment for lands in Longhope

(a) See Bishop Kennett's Paroch. Antiq.

(b) See App. to second Gen. Report from Commissioners on Public Records, 381, 383-4.

(c) 4 Inst. 269.

(e) P. 269. So Redborne, Angl. Sacr. tom. i. p. 257. "Vocatus Domysday; et vocatur sic, quiù nulli parcit sicut nee magnus dies judicii."

(f) Ante, p. 687. n. (e).

(g) 1 Brownl. 43. S. C. Hob. 188.

(d) Spelm. Gloss. v. Domesday. Ca. 230. Lex Man. 30. And see 4 Inst. 269.

in Gloucestershire, and at the trial Domesday-book was brought into court by an officer of the Exchequer, by which it appeared that Hope was Ancient Demesne, but there was no mention of Longhope, upon which the counsel for the defendant offered to prove that Hope and Longhope were one and the same place; but the court would not admit such proof, and held that the defendant should have pleaded that it was known as well by the one name as the other (a).

And unless the manor or land is mentioned under the title terræ Regis or terræ Regis Edwardi (b), in Domesday-book, it will not be deemed Ancient Demesne, although the book itself should furnish evidence of a grant thereof from the Crown (c).

There are three sorts of tenants in Ancient Demesne, one who hold their lands freely by the grant of the King; a second, who hold of a manor which is Ancient Demesne, but not at the will of the lord, and whose estates pass by surrender, or deed of grant or bargain and sale, and admittance, and denominated customary freeholders (d); and a third who hold of a manor, which is Ancient Demesne, by copy of court roll, at the will of the lord, and denominated copyholders of base tenure, which latter cannot maintain a writ of Right Close (e) or Monstraverunt (ƒ), but are to sue by plaint in the lord's court (g).

(a) Holdy v. Hodges, 1 Sid. 147. S. C. (Holdage v. Hodges) 1 Lev. 106. And see similar issues as to the manor of Sudbury in Suffolk, Dy. 250. b. 9 Co. 31. a; and the manor of Otterbury, Saunders v. Welch, cited 1 Salk. 57. Vide also, 1 Nels. Abr. 210. (A). 1 New Abr. 110. (A. marg.)

(b) Ante, p. 687. (c) Kitch. 192-3. Saunders v. Welch. sup.

(d) And these, it is said, even when holding by copy of court roll, may have a Monstraverunt, and use a writ of Right Close, Kitch. pp. 158-9, 194. Co. Cop. s. 32. Tr. 58. (e) See as to this writ, post. p. 695, et seq.

(f) Br. Abr. 'Ancient Demesne,' pl. 41. Kitch. 159. F. N. B. 14 D. 16 E. Co. Cop. s. 51. Tr. 118, 119; Pymmock v. Hilder, Cro. Jac. 559. See as to this writ, post. p. 694-5.

(g) Ante, pt. 1. p. 562. et seq.

Of the Privileges incident to this Tenure.

It should seem that by the terms of the original grants of land, of the tenure of ancient demesne, the grantees bound themselves to cultivate the King's demesnes for the sustenance of his household (a); and to supply provisions for the King's garrisons, and for the soldiers in other places, in time of war or rebellion (b); for which services certain privileges were secured to them, regarding both their persons and estates, for they appear to be excused (but in respect only of their lands held in ancient demesne) from serving on juries or inquests out of their manor or seigniory (c); and from taxes and tallages granted by parliament, if not specially charged (d); and from payment of pontage and toll of passage (e): And this latter privilege extends as well to tenants who hold of a subject as of the king;

(a) See 1 Leo. 232, in Ward & Knight's case. 2 Inst. 221, 542. 4 Inst. 269. Lex Man. 29, 81. 2 Sho. 16, in the King v. Bettworth. Hob. 48, in Cox v. Barnsly.

(b) See the Town of Leicester's case, 2 Leo. 191. Lex Man. 29 n. Ib. 32-3.

(c) F. N. B. 14 F. 4 Inst. 269. Br. Auncien Demesne, pl. 42. “Tenants of ancient demesne shall be exempt from the leet, view of frankpledge, and from Sheriff's tourns." Br. Aunc. Dem. pl. 49, cites the Reg. fo. 181. And see F. N. B. 14. E. marg. But ancient demesne is no exemption from serving the office of high constable. King v. Bettsworth, 2 Sho. 75. S. C. Anon. 1 Vent. 344.

(d) But I apprehend that all general acts of Parliament extend to ancient demesne lands, when the te

nure is not prejudiced by the purview of such acts. See 1 And. 71, &c. 4 Inst. 270. Hob. 48. Com. Dig. Ancient Demesne (K). Ante pt. 1. p.99.

(e) Br. Aunc. Dem. pl. 43, 49. Ib. Priviledge, pl. 56, F. N. B. 14, 228. 2 Inst. 542. 4 Inst. 269. Kitch. 194. Hob. 48, in Cox v. Barnsly. Ancient Demesne tenants were also exempt from contribution to the expenses of knights in Parliament; see all the authorities referred to in this note. Vide also ante, p. 672. Heyw. C. 82, [2d ed.]

Tenants in ancient demesne, holding by copy of court roll, were excluded by 31 Geo. 2. c. 14, from the privilege of voting at elections. Vide Heyw. C. 75, &c. Male [2d ed.] 133, 285. Ante p. 674. But see reference to 2 W. 4. C. 45, ante pt. 1. p. 661, n. (b).

and to tenants for life or years, or even at will (a). But the exemption from toll is only in respect of such things as arise or grow on the land, or as are bought for manuring it, or for the necessary use of the tenant and his family, and does not extend to general merchandize (b); but this was formerly doubted (c). Whether merchandize or not is to be shown on the other side, so that the tenant may allege an exemption generally (d). He need not prescribe for the privilege, as it is incident to his estate, and it is sufficient to say that he is tenant and inhabitant within the manor of A., which is ancient demesne (e): And though safer to allege notice that he was tenant in ancient demesne, it does not seem to be necessary (ƒ).

Tenants in ancient demesne are also to be impleaded in the lord's court only by a writ of right close (g), directed to the lord of the manor, commanding him to do the tenant who prosecutes the writ, what is right in his court (h); and if tenants in ancient demesne are otherwise impleaded, they may plead their tenure in abatement of the suit, but this, as we shall presently see, is only where the realty may come in question.

(a) F.N.B. 228 D. Savery v. Smith, 2 Lutw. 1146. 2 Leo. 191. 2 Vin. Abr. 481 (C). 1 Roll. Abr. 322 (C). And to the lord himself, F. N. B. 228 B. Savery v. Smith, sup. Br. Auncien Demesne, pl. 43: (If he be tenant also, 1 Roll. Abr. 322 D, cites 9 H. 6. 25. b). See the form of the writ of exemption from Toll, F. N. B. 228. A.

(b) Ward v. Knight, Cro. Eliz. 227. S. C. 1 Leo. 232-3. 2 Inst. 221. 1 Roll. Abr. 321 (B). 2 Leo. 191.

(c) F.N.B. 228. A. & E. 1 Roll. Abr. 321 (B) pl. 2, 3.

(d) Lutw. 1146-7, in Savery v. Smith.

(e) Ib. In the case of the Town

of Leicester, 2 Leo. 191, Shule, Just. was of opinion, "that an inhabitant within Ancient Demeśne, although he be not tenant, shall have the privileges."

(f) Savery v. Smith, sup.

(g) But see reference to the act of 3 & 4 W. IV. c. 27, post p. 695. n. (f).

(h) 2 Inst. 542. 4 Inst. 269. See the forms of this writ. Reg. f. 9. F. N. B. 11. A tenant in Ancient Demesne may also have a bill of fresh force in the court of Ancient Demesne, within forty days after disseisin, without any writ sued, Kitch. 188-9. F. N. B. 13 E. Br. Aunc. Dem. pl. 1, cites 26 H. 8. 4.

Of the Writs of Monstraverunt; and de non ponendis.

Monstraverunt. Should tenants in ancient demesne be distrained by their lords to perform other customs or services than they and their ancestors have usually performed, they may be relieved by the writ of monstraverunt (a), founded on a petition and ordinance of Parliament (b), and directed to the lord, commanding him not to distrain contrary to such ancient usage, upon which another writ of monstraverunt may be sued, directed to the sheriff, commanding him to cause justice to be done, if the lord be disobedient.

But the lord cannot be put to answer the attachment, before the court be certified by the exchequer, that the manor is ancient demesne, therefore the plaintiff in the monstraverunt should sue a special writ to the treasurer and chamberlain of the exchequer, to certify the same (c).

Yet it seems that the certificate lawfully coming into court by certiorari and mittimus, is conclusive, though there be no issue joined, whether frank fee or ancient demesne (d).

The sheriff may make resistance and rescous to any distress by the lord; and in case of the lord's distraining again, the tenants may sue an attachment against the lord, returnable in the King's Bench or Common Pleas, and recover their damages (e). If the lord distrain them pending the attachment, they may have a special attachment directing the sheriff to make deliverance (ƒ).

The writ of monstraverunt may be sued generally, without showing the names of the tenants, but in the attachment against the lord, the tenants suing it must be named (g), or at

(a) See the forms of this writ, F. N. B. 14, 15.

(b) 18 Ed. 1. 27. It should seem that the tenants may have this writ without being distrained, 40 Ed. 3. 44. F. N. B. 14 F.

(c) F.N.B. 16 C. See this writ. Ib.

(d) Ib. n. a., cites 7 H. 6. 32. 39. E. 3. 6.

(e) F. N. B. 15 B.
(f) F. N. B. 15 I.

(g) Plowd. 129. F. N. B. 15 D., F. And see 4 Inst. 269.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »