PART I — ENGLISH ROADS
[2] And possibly, in early times, of roads also; see McKechnie, “Magna Carta,” Glasgow, 1905, p. 353. On the Trinoda or Trimoda Necessitas, see W. H. Stevenson, in the “English Historical Review,” Oct. 1914.
[3] “History of Rome,” translated by W. P. Dickson, London, 1886, book viii. chap. v.
[4] J. Horsley, “Britannia Romana,” London, 1732, p. 391.
[5] H. M. Scarth, “Roman Britain,” S.P.C.K., London, 1883, p. 121. Cf. T. Codrington, “Roman Roads in Britain,” S.P.C.K., 1903.
[6] When Henry VIII gave the lands of the dissolved monastery of Christ Church to Canterbury Cathedral, he declared that he made this donation “in order that charity to the poor, the reparation of roads and bridges, and other pious offices of all kinds should multiply and spread afar.” Elton, “Tenures of Kent,” London, 1867, p. 21. The gift is made “in liberam, puram et perpetuam eleemosynam.” This pious character was long continued: “As late as the period of the Commonwealth land and money devoted to the maintenance of bridges and causeys were definitely included among the charitable uses which were to be unaffected by the sequestration of Bishops’ land and other ecclesiastical revenues.” C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,” Selden Society, 1905, i. p. xxi.
[7] Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and Prices in England,” Oxford, 1866, vol. i. p. 138.
[8] See “Recherches historiques sur les congrégations hospitalières des frères pontifes,” by M. Grégoire, late Bishop of Blois. Paris, 1818.
[9] This practice was inherited from the Roman builders, whose formularies continued to be transcribed throughout the middle ages. See Victor Mortet: “Un Formulaire du VIIIe siécle pour les fondations d’édifices et de ponts d’après des sources d’origine antique,” in “Bulletin monumental . . . de la Société française d’Archéologie,” vol. 71, 1907, p. 443. The brief chapter in the “Mappæ Clavicula” (still copied in the twelfth century), entitled “De fabrica in aqua,” recommends that, “Si fabricam in aqua necesse fuerit erigere, facis arcam triangulam,” arca meaning caisson. In this we see, Mr. Mortet writes, “la disposition venue de l’antiquité, transmise et maintenue au moyen-âge, de la forme prismatique triangulaire des avant-becs des ponts” (p. [461]). This characteristic was conspicuous, e.g. in the Avignon and London bridges (see the picture, p. [45]) as well as in the famous Roman Pont du Gard.
[10] On French mediæval bridges still in existence, their dates, modes of construction, crosses and chapels, see C. Enlart, “Manuel d’Archéologie Française,” Paris, 1902, ff. vol. ii. p. 264.
[11] May 17, 1373, original in French. “John of Gaunt’s Register,” ed. S. Armitage Smith, London, 1911, vol. ii. p. 179. The work was apparently in progress in 1374, since we find, on the 15th of September of that year, an order to deliver to the same “trois cheisnes covenables” from Okeden forest. Ibid., p. 240.
[12] “Ubi frequens habetur populi transitus.” “Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense,” ed. Hardy, Rolls Series, 1875, vol. i. pp. 615, 641, A.D. 1314. This was a quite usual practice. The popes, who had every reason to be interested in the welfare of the great bridge at Avignon, published numerous bulls granting indulgences and other spiritual favours to the benefactors of the edifice. See “Bullaire des indulgences concédées avant 1431 à l’œuvre du Pont d’Avignon,” published by the Marquis de Ripert-Monclar, Paris, 1912. The work contains the Latin text of papal bulls of 1281, 1290, 1343, 1353, 1366, 1371, 1397, 1430, 1431. The bull of 1343, issued by Pope Clement VI, at Avignon, grants to givers “tres annos et tres quadragenas,” and, under certain conditions, a plenary indulgence at the time of death: “Siquis vero catholicus dictis fratribus . . . secundum quantitatem substancie et qualitatem . . . de bonis sibi a Deo collatis dederit vel transmiserit quoquo modo ad reparacionem dicti pontis, . . . si talis infra annum . . . vere penitens ac confessus ab hac luce decesserit, volumus et gratia speciali concedimus quod ab omnibus peccatis suis remaneat absolutus.” As for those who should be so bold as to hamper in any way the collections made by the brothers for their bridge, their punishment would be nothing less than excommunication (p. 6).
[13] “Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense,” ed. Hardy, Rolls Series, 1875, vol. i. p. 507.
[14] “Itinerary,” ed. L. T. Smith, vol. v. p. 144.
[15] Certificates of Chantries, quoted in “English Gilds, the Original Ordinances from MSS. of the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries,” ed. Toulmin Smith. E. E. T. S., 1870, p. 249. Gilds in Rochester, Bristol, Ludlow, &c., did the same.
[16] Text of the time of Edward IV, but “copied from laws still older.” “English Gilds,” as above, pp. 374, 411.
[17] “Archæologia,” vols. xxvii. p. 77; xxix. p. 380.
[18] “Cartularium Abbathiæ de Whiteby,” edited by J. C. Atkinson, Durham, Surtees Society, 1881, vol. ii. p. 401. The original of the Rosels contract is in Latin.
[19] Skeat’s edition, Text C, pas. x. l. 29, et seq.
[20] Most of the French ones were dedicated to St. Nicholas, patron of travellers.
[21] Fleet bridge outside Ludgate, Oldbourne (Holborn) bridge, both of stone. Fleet bridge had been repaired by the mayor, John Wels, in 1431, “for,” says Stow, “on the coping is engraven Wels imbraced by Angels.” “Survey of London,” ed. Kingsford, Oxford, 1908, 2 vols., vol. i. p. 26. The “Survey” had appeared in 1598, and been reprinted, with important additions in 1603.
[22] “The earliest proof [of the existence of a timber bridge] is in the record of the drowning of a witch at ‘Lundene brigce’ in King Edgar’s time.” Kingsford, Stow’s “Survey,” as above, vol. ii. p. 273.
[23] Stow’s “Survey,” i. p. 23. Stow, who examined the accounts of the bridge wardens for the year 1506 (22 Hen. VII), found that the bridge expenses were at that time £815 17s. 2d.
[24] King John became personally acquainted with those works only at a later date, viz. June 1206, when he landed at La Rochelle. He visited Saintes in July and August, and made again some stay at La Rochelle in October and November before sailing back to England. See his Itinerary in “A Description of the Patent Rolls in the Tower,” by Thomas Duffus Hardy, London, 1835.
[25] See Appendix I. p 425.
[26] Stow’s “Survey,” ed. Kingsford, I. p. 23.
[27] Ibid., same edition, I. 25; II. 274. “Chronicles of London Bridge,” by an Antiquary [Richard Thomson], London, 1827, pp. 187–193.
[28] As to the toll collected there from certain foreign merchants A.D. 1334, see “Liber Albus,” ed. Riley, Introduction, p. l.
[29] “Scaligerana,” under the word “Londres.” The editions I have seen give “mers de navires,” the true reading being certainly “mâts.” An enlarged portion of Visscher’s panoramic view of London, 1616, showing the “Bridge Gate” towards Southwark, with numerous mast-like poles and heads on the top of them, serves as a frontispiece for vol. iii. of my “Literary History of the English People.”
[30] “Euphues and his England,” 1st ed. 1580; Arber’s reprint, 1868, p. 434. See besides the large coloured drawing of about the year 1600 (also the sketch above, p. [45]), in the third part of Harrison’s “Description of England,” edited by F. J. Furnivall for the New Shakspere Society, 1877; and Mr. Wheatley’s notes on Norden’s Map of London, 1593, in vol. i. p. lxxxix of the same work. Visitors coming to London never failed to notice the bridge as one of the curiosities of the town. Dunbar, the Scottish poet, in his “London,” written in the early years of the sixteenth century, compliments the city on its beauties, and especially its bridge:
“Upon thy lusty brigge of pylers white
Been merchauntis full royall to behold.”
The Greek Nicander Nucius of Corcyra, who visited England in 1545–6, writes in his note-book: “A certain very large bridge is built, affording a passage to those in the city to the opposite inhabited bank, supported by stone cemented arches, and having also houses and turrets upon it.” “Travels of Nicander Nucius,” Camden Society, 1841, p. 7.
[31] F. de Belleforest, “L’ancienne et grande cité de Paris,” ed. Dufour, 1882, p. 274.
[32] See woodcuts in “Le livre des Ordonnances de la ville de Paris,” published by Vérard, 1500, reproduced by Claudin, “Histoire de l’Imprimerie,” 1900, vol. ii. pp. 498, 499.
[33] “Staple of News,” ii. 4; acted 1626, ed. De Winter, 1905, p. xviii.
[34] In “Works of Ben Jonson,” London, 1816, v. 215.
[35] “Chronicles of London Bridge by an Antiquary” [Richard Thomson], London, 1827.
[36] See Appendix II. p. 426.
[37] “The Itinerary of John Leland,” edited by Miss Lucy Toulmin Smith, London, 1907, vol. ii. pp. 27, 49.
[38] “The North Riding Record Society,” edited by the Rev. J. C. Atkinson, London, vol. iii. part i. p. 33.
[39] Edward III gives the not insignificant sum of £15 for the reparation of the bridge at Newcastle-upon-Tyne. “Roll of Thomas de Brantingham,” ed. Devon, p. 392, 44 Ed. III.
[40] Yarm on the Tees, 44 miles north-north-west of York. The “king’s highway” in question is the highroad from Scotland, leading to the south, through York and London. The bridge was re-built in 1400 by Skirlaw, Bishop of Durham.
[41] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 468. The right of pontage is frequently mentioned in the “Liber Custumarum,” edited by Riley, Rolls Series.
[42] “Sciatis quod, in auxilium Pontis London, reparandi et sustentandi, concessimus vobis quod . . . capiatis ibidem de rebus venalibus ultra pontem predictum et subtus eundem transeuntibus consuetudines subscriptas, videlicet . . .” Then follows a very long list of dues. Text in Hearne’s “Liber niger Scaccarii . . . Accedunt chartæ antiquæ,” London, 1774, vol. i. p. 478*.
[43] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 88.
[44] See Hist. MSS. Commission, 9th Report, part i. p. 284. On the Rochester bridge, at first a wooden one, later rebuilt in stone, and on its upkeep, see “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. iii. p. 254, 21 Ric. II, 1397. A view of the bridge appears on several seals, some reproduced in De Gray Birch, “Seals in . . . the British Museum,” London, 1887, 2 vols., No. 5336. On this important bridge and its biography, see C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,” 1905, Selden Society, I., p. 203. Like many others, this very frequented bridge, on the road from London to Canterbury, and which existed long before the Conquest, was first of wood, then of stone, and is now (since 1856) of iron.
[45] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 100, year 1338.
[46] “King Edward kept his feast of Christmas (1281) at Worcester. From this Christmas till the purification of Our Lady, there was such a frost and snow, as no man living could remember the like, wherethrough five arches of London Bridge, and all Rochester Bridge were borne downe, and carried away with the streame, and the like hapned to many bridges in England.” Stow’s “Annales,” London, 1631, p. 201. See Appendix III.
[47] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 91 (9 Edward III), 1335.
[48] Ibid., p. 350.
[49] “De pontibus et calcetis fractis et communibus transitibus, quis ea reparare debeat et sustinere.” “Fleta” (end of thirteenth century, below p. [111]), I. ch. 20, § 41.
[50] I.e. the jury “of good and true men.” “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 111.
[51] Several instances will be found in Appendix IV. p. [429].
[52] John Scott, “Berwick-upon-Tweed,” London, 1888, p. 408, et seq.
[53] Ormerod, “History of Chester,” 1819, vol. i. p. 285.
[54] “Archæologia,” t. xix. p. 310.
[55] The date is shown by a will of the 24th of August, 1483, in which a sum is left towards the building of the chapel to be erected on Rotherham Bridge. See J. Guest, “Historic Notices of Rotherham,” Worksop, 1879, fol., pp. 125–6. Two views of the bridge and chapel are given, pp. 126 and 581.
[56] Camden’s “Britannia,” ed. Gough, vol. iii., Lond., 1789, pp. 38–9.
[57] T. Kilby, “Views in Wakefield,” 1843, fol.; J. C. and C. A. Buckler, “Remarks upon Wayside Chapels,” Oxford, 1843.
[58] “Twenty marks were left towards the rebuilding of this bridge, by John Cook, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 2 Rich. II, 1379.” E. Mackenzie, “View of the County of Northumberland,” 1825, vol. ii. p. 111.
[59] “Faerie Queene,” Bk. iv. canto x.
[60] Mentioned by Leland: “High Bridge hath but one great arch, and over a pece of it is a chapelle of St. George” (“Itinerary,” ed. L. T. Smith, i. 29), which chapel had been first dedicated to St. Thomas of Canterbury, but had apparently just been rebaptized, when Leland saw it, Henry VIII having decided by a proclamation of November 16, 1538, that other saints might be saints, but this one was not.
[61] See a sketch of it, above, p. [21].
[62] “History of Chester,” London, 1819, vol. i. p. 285.
[63] Dugdale, “Warwickshire,” 1730, ii. 724.
[64] J. G. Wood, “The Principal Rivers of Wales,” London, 1813, vol. ii. p. 271.
[65] The Countess of Norfolk complains to Parliament that, contrary to their franchise, her tenants have been compelled to contribute towards the building of the bridge at Huntingdon. “Rolls of Parliament,” 1 Ric. II, year 1377.
[66] See F. Stone, “Picturesque Views of the Bridges of Norfolk,” Norwich, 1830. Rough sketches of more than thirty old English bridges appear in a curious engraving by Daniel King (seventeenth century), bearing as a title: “An orthographical designe of severall viewes vpon ye road in England and Wales,” and as a subscription: “This designe is to illustrate Cambden’s Britannia, that where he mentions such places the curious may see them, which is the indeavour, by Gods assistance, of
“Y. S. Daniell King.”
A copy is bound in the MS. Harl. 2073, as fol. 126. Catterick Bridge (supra p. [54]) is among the bridges there represented.
[67] “The Itinerary of John Leland,” ed. Lucy Toulmin Smith, London, 1907, 5 vols., iv. p. 137.
[68] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 48, 18 Edward I, A.D. 1289.
[69] Ibid., vol. i. p. 424; 18 Edward II, 1324.
[70] Ibid., vol. i. p. 314; 8 Edward II.
[71] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. iii. p. 598; 7 and 8 Henry IV. In the same way as for bridges, taxes were sometimes levied but misapplied. See, in C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,” 1905, i. p. 25, how William Caldecote of Aylesbury had been duly authorized to levy a tax of one penny or one half-penny on carts of various sorts, and one farthing on “every horse carrying goods for sale that should pass along Walton street which leads from Walton to Aylesbury for the maintenance of the said road, and that whereas the said William so received in 11 Rich. II over and above the sum spent on the repair of the road 24s. which remain in his hands, the road is flooded and dangerous by his default.”
[72] Grandson and great-grandson of the two Despensers who had been executed in 1326 by order of Queen Isabella, their estates being confiscated.
[73] Ed. Siméon Luce, vol. i. p. 257.
[74] Royal Itineraries show, for instance, that in the 28th year of his reign, Edward I changed seventy-five times his place of abode, that is about three times each fortnight. “Liber quotidianus Garderobæ,” London, 1787, p. lxvii.
[75] McKechnie, “Magna Carta,” 1905, p. 357.
[76] “Chronica monasterii de Melsa,” ed. E. A. Bond; Rolls Series, 1868, London, vol. iii. preface, p. xv.
[77] Patent Roll, 27 Edward III, in Rymer (ed. 1708), vol. v. p. 774. See as to the repair of this same road in 1314, thirty-nine years earlier, “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. i. p. 302 b.
[78] Riley’s “Memorials of London,” London, 1868, p. 291.
[79] Ordonance of March 1, 1388, “Recueil d’Isambert,” vol. vi. p. 665. On the state of roads and bridges and on travelling in France, see d’Avenel, “L’Évolution des Moyens de Transport,” Paris, 1919.
[80] “Rolls of Parliament,” ii. p. 107.
[81] See frontispiece of this volume, and p. [14].
[82] To give shelter (“tego,” I shelter, in the enumeration devised by St. Thomas Aquinas) was one of the seven “Works of Charity.” In the evening prayers at home, in my childhood, part of which had been handed down from remote times, travellers were still remembered, as well as those who had been “bitten by venomous beasts.”
[83] See representations of these carts in the manuscripts of the fourteenth century, and especially in MS. Roy., 10 E. IV, in the British Museum, fol. 63, 94, 110, &c., and in the Louterell psalter. We give above a facsimile of one of them, and further a representation of a reaper’s cart from the Louterell psalter. See also Bodl. MS. 264, fos. 42, 84, 103, 110.
[84] Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and Prices,” i. pp. 650–661.
[85] “Statutes of the Realm,” 4 Edward III, ch. 3. Eight bushels make a quarter. [The Act 25 Edward III, stat. 5, ch. 10, A.D. 1351, provided that every measure of corn should be striken without heap, and that the royal purveyors should use this measure. Hence the name strike for a bushel. L. T. S.]
[86] Statute 36 Edward III, stat. 1, ch. 2.
[87] See several texts in Appendix V. p. [430].
[88] A shape in use from the remotest times. Carriages quite similar to those painted in our mediæval MSS. are to be seen on the alabaster funeral chests of Etruscan days, for example at the Guarnacei Museum, Volterra, in Italy, where there is an abundance of them, showing the dead, in their own round-topped, richly ornamented carriage, on their way to the other world.
[89] Representations of carriages of this kind are frequent in manuscripts. Many are to be found, with two wheels and an abundance of ornamentation, in the romance of King Meliadus (MS. of the fourteenth century in the British Museum, Add. 12,228, fos. 198, 243). The celebrated four wheeled carriage of the Louterell psalter, also of fourteenth century, is here reproduced. It is drawn by five horses harnessed single file. On the second sits a postilion with a short whip of several thongs; on the fifth, that is, the nearest to the carriage, sits another postilion with a long whip of the shape in use at the present day.
[90] La Tour-Landry relates a story of a holy hermit who saw in a dream his nephew’s wife in purgatory. The demons were pushing burning needles into her eyebrows. An angel told him that it was because she had trimmed her eyebrows and temples, and increased her forehead, and plucked out her hair, thinking to beautify herself and to please the world. “Le livre du Chevalier de La Tour-Landry,” ed. Montaiglon, Paris, 1854. An English translation of the fifteenth century was published by the Early English Text Society in 1868.
[91] The king’s sister. Devon’s “Issues of the Exchequer,” 1837, p. 142. As Englished by Devon, the Latin text referred to would mean that the receiver of the money and maker of the carriage was Master la Zousche, but la Zousche was the clerk of the wardrobe, who had the money from the Exchequer to give it to John le Charer, “per manus John le Charer.” Per has here the meaning of pro, a use of the word of which several instances may be found in Du Cange. This indication of Devon’s mistake is due to the late Mr. Bradshaw, of Cambridge.
[92] Thorold Rogers, “History of Agriculture and Prices,” i. pp. 361–363.
[93] Curious representations of such litters are to be found in mediæval manuscripts; for instance, the one here reproduced from the MS. 118 Français, in the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, fol. 285, where two persons are to be seen using the litter, a lady and a wounded knight (Romance of Lancelot, fourteenth century); or in the MS. Roy, 18 E. II, in the British Museum, fol. 7 (Chronicles of Froissart).
[94] “Paston Letters,” 1422–1509, edited by Jas. Gairdner, 1872, vol. i. p. 49; spelling modernized.
[95] Roy. 10 E. IV.
[96] Fol. 310.
[97] “A Description of the Patent Rolls . . . to which is added an Itinerary of King John,” by T. Duffus Hardy, London, 1835.
[98] 1299–1300. “Liber quotidianus Garderobæ,” Society of Antiquaries, London, 1787, p. 67.
[99] “Archers. And xxiiij archers on foote for garde of the kinge’s body, who shall goe before the kinge as he travaleth thorough the cuntry” (“King Edward II’s . . . Ordinances,” 1323, ed. Furnivall, p. 46).
[100] “Fleta, seu commentarius juris Anglicani, editio secunda,” London 1685, lib. ii. cap. 2, 4. This treatise is believed to have been composed in the Fleet prison by a lawyer in the time of Edward I. It is later than 1292, for mention is made in it of the submission of Scotland.
[101] Lib. ii. cap. 5. The ordinance of Edward II mentioned further, p. [108], speaks only of the brand by a hot iron on the forehead. “King Edward II’s Household and Wardrobe Ordinances,” A.D. 1323, Chaucer Society, ed. Furnivall, 1876.
[102] Lib. ii. cap. 14, 15.
[103] He sent a mandatum to this effect, and he withdrew it when the king changed his mind as to the place where he wished to go, which happened often enough. “Debet autem senescallus nomine capitalis justitiarii cujus vices gerit mandare vicecomiti loci ubi dominus rex fuerit declinaturus, quod venire faciat ad certum diem, ubicumque tunc rex fuerit in ballivia sua, omnes assisas comitatus sui et omnes prisones cum suis atachiamentis.” “Fleta,” lib. ii. cap. 3, § 4.
[104] “Habet etiam ex virtute officii sui potestatem procedendi ad utlagationes et duella jungendi et singula faciendi quæ ad justitiarios itinerantes, prout supra dictum est pertinent faciendi.” “Fleta,” lib. ii. cap. 3, § 11.
[105] “Fleta,” lib. ii. cap. 3, § 9.
[106] “Original authority of the King’s Council,” p. 115.
[107] “The county is divided into hundreds or into wapentakes or into wards, the term wapentake appearing in Yorkshire, Lincolnshire, Derbyshire, Nottinghamshire, the term ward in the northernmost counties.” (“History of English Law before Edward I,” by Sir Frederick Pollock and F. W. Maitland, Cambridge, 2 vols., 1895, vol. i. p. 543.) At the head of the hundred was the bailiff, appointed by the sheriff, acting under him, and giving also rise to numerous complaints. See, e.g. “Rolls of Parliament,” ii. 357, a petition of 1376.
[108] The lists which have reached us “leave us doubting whether any of them had received a solemn sanction from the central power.” Same “History of English Law,” ii. 508. On the origin, growth, decay, uses and abuses of the institution, see W. A. Morris, “The Frankpledge System,” London, 1910.
[109] In many places great people, lay or ecclesiastic, had somehow secured for themselves the properly royal privilege of holding the “view”; it became attached to some manors and was conveyed with them. See the petition of an abbess who claims the view of frankpledge attached to the manor of Shorwalle, Isle of Wight, which had been given her; Isabella de Forte disputes her this right, the real object of the quarrel between the two ladies being the fines levied when the view was held.
Towards the end of the fourteenth century the frankpledge had fallen into decay.
[110] “Magna Carta,” cap. 42 of the second confirmation by Henry III (1217); Stubbs’ “Select Charters,” p. 337. “Nec liceat alicui vicecomiti vel ballivo tenere turnum suum per hundredum nisi bis per annum;” “Fleta,” Lib. ii. cap. 52.
[111] See Appendix VI, p. [431].
[112] “The articles for the London eyre of 1244 are in ‘Munimenta Gildhallæ,’ i. 79; those for the eyre of 1321 are in ‘Munim. Gild.,’ ii. 347. The latter are fully seven times as long as the former and fill fifteen octavo pages.” Pollock and Maitland, “History of English Law,” ii. 519; cf. “Fleta,” i. cap. 19 and 20: “De Processu coram Justiciariis itinerantibus—De capitulis Coronæ et Itineris.”
[113] Originally, custos placitorum coronæ, record keeper of the pleas of the Crown.
[114] In existence also in France and Germany from the earliest times, thus defined in the “Grand Coutumier de Normandie,” chap. 54: “Il ne doit être crié fors pour cause criminelle, si comme pour feu et pour larcin ou pour homicide ou pour autre évident péril, si comme si aucun court sus à un autre le couteau trait. Car cil qui crie haro sans apert (obvious) péril le doit amender au prince . . . A ce cri doivent isser tous ceux qui l’ont oui.” This custom remained in use in Normandy until the French Revolution. Glasson, “Origines de la clameur de haro,” Paris, 1882. In England the statutes concerning the “hue and cry” were repealed only in 1827.
[115] “Fleta,” lib. i. cap. 19, 20. See also “Local Self-Government and Centralization,” by Toulmin Smith, 1848, pp. 220–232, 298.
[116] “Mais de cler jour, à la veue de toutz, issint qe gentz de pays puissent veer la peine et la hounte que les ditz atteintz ount, et par tant en soient les meuz chastiez.” Year, probably, 33 Ed. I; Palgrave, “Original Authority of the King’s Council,” p. 56.
[117] Reeves, “History of English Law,” ed. Finlason, ii. p. 408.
[118] Prologue to the “Canterbury Tales;” The Monk.
[119] See Appendix VII, p. [432].
[120] “Household Expenses of Richard de Swinfield,” ed. J. Webb, 1854, Camden Society, vols. i. p. 125, ii. pp. xxx–xxxvi. The duels of Thomas de Bruges were not those of the cases of felony and crime which resulted in the death of the vanquished; it was merely the duel with staff and shield, cum fuste et scuto, which required, as may be imagined, the replacement of the champion much less frequently. In the twenty-ninth year of Edward III, a duel took place by means of champions between the Bishop of Salisbury and the Earl of Salisbury. When the judges, conformably to the laws, came to examine the dress of the combatants, they found that the bishop’s champion had several sheets of prayers and incantations sown in his garments (“Year Books of Edward I,” Rolls Series, 32–33d year, preface, p. xvi, note). This examination of the clothing was always made with the intention of discovering frauds of this kind, which were considered as the most dangerous and disloyal of all.
[121] See Riley’s “Liber Albus,” p. 303, where the case is entered in full.
[122] One has only to peruse Froissart to notice the extreme frequency of this custom. Jean de Hainaut arrives at Denain: “There he lodged in the abbey that night” (lib. i. part i. ch. 14); the queen disembarks in England with the same Jean de Hainaut, “and then they found a great abbey of black monks which is called St. Aymon, and they were harboured there and refreshed for three days” (ch. 18); “there the king stopped and lodged in an abbey” (ch. 292); “King Philippe came to the good town of Amiens, and there lodged in the abbey of Gard” (ch. 296), etc.
[123] “The Knights Hospitallers in England,” edited by Larking and Kemble, Camden Society, 1857. It is the text of a manuscript found at Malta entitled, “Extenta terrarum et tenementorum Hospitalis Sancti Johannis Jerusalem in Anglia, A.D. 1338.”
[124] “Knights Hospitallers,” pp. 99, 101, 127. The effect of the Scottish wars on the possessions of the Knights is strikingly set forth: “Omnes possessiones hospitalis in Scocia sunt destructa, combusta per fortem guerram ibidem per multos annos continuatam unde nil his diebus potest levari. Solebat tamen, tempore pacis, reddere per annum, cc marcas” (p. 129).
[125] See Appendix VIII, p. [433].
[126] Statute 3 Edward I, cap. 1.
[127] Statute 9 Edward II, cap. 11, Articuli Cleri, A.D. 1315–1316.
[128] “Fleta,” lib. i. cap. 20, § 68, 72.
[129] “Rolls of Parliament,” iii. p. 501, A.D. 1402.
[130] Ibid., iii. p. 82, A.D. 1379–80. The clergy, on the other hand, complain that the sheriffs sometimes come “with their wives and other excessive number of people on horseback as well as on foot,” to stay in monasteries, under pretext of collecting monies for the king. Ibid. p. 26, A.D. 1377.
[131] “Inventories of St. Mary’s Hospital, or Maison Dieu, Dover,” by M. E. C. Walcott, “Archæologia Cantiana,” London, 1869.
[132] “Mensæ de medio removentur,” or, in the English version by S. Bateman, of 1582, fol. 81, “when they have eaten, boord, clothes, and reliefe bee borne awaye”—description of a dinner in England, by Bartholomew the Englishman (de Glanville), 13th century. “Bartholomi Anglici de proprietatibus rerum,” Frankfort, 1609, lib. vi. cap. 32. Smollett, in the eighteenth century, notes the existence of similar customs in Scotland; people dine, then sleep in the hall, where mattresses are stretched, replacing the tables (“Humphrey Clinker”).
[133] “Hall and chamber, for litter, 20d.; hall and chamber, for rushes, 16d.; hall, &c., for litter, 1d., &c.” Extracts from the “Rotulus familiæ,” 18 Ed. I, “Archæologia,” vol. xv. p. 350. The king was then at Langley Castle, Buckinghamshire.
[134] Turner and Parker, “Domestic Architecture in England, from Edward I to Richard II,” Oxford, 1853, p. 75. See also in “Archæologia,” vi. p. 366, the illustrated description of the royal hall at Eltham.
[135] Eclogue III in the edition of the “Cytezen and Vplondyshman,” published by the Percy Society, 1847, p. li.
[136] “The Vision concerning Piers the Plowman,” ed. Skeat, Text B, passus x. line 96.
“Chascuns ne gist mie a part soy,
Mais deux et deux en chambre obscure,
Ou le plus souvent troy et troy,
En un seul lit à l’aventure,”
with fleas as big as those of the monks of Citeaux. “Œuvres Complètes,” ed. de Queux de St. Hilaire, vol vii. pp. 79, 117.
[138] “Works,” Skeat, iv, 595.
[139] Statutes 23 Ed. III, ch. 6, and 27 Ed. III, st. 1, ch. 3. As to the inns of the Middle Ages, see Francisque Michel and Ed. Fournier, “La Grande Bohème, histoire de classes réprouvées,” vol. i, “Hôtelleries et cabarets,” Paris, 1851; d’Avenel, “L’évolution des Moyens de Transport,” Paris, 1919. There is in the “Vetusta monumenta,” vol. iv, 1815, pl. xxxv., a fine view of the George Inn at Glastonbury (fifteenth century). The New Inn at Gloucester, Northgate-street, is a good specimen of an English inn of the fifteenth century (below, p. [131]. Charming sketches of several by Herbert Railton adorn an article on “Coaching Days and Coaching Ways,” in the “English Illustrated Magazine,” July, 1888. See also Turner and Parker, who mention several, of the fifteenth century, “Domestic Architecture,” vol. iii. pp. 46 ff.
[140] The Latin text of their account of expenses was published by Thorold Rogers in his “History of Agriculture and Prices,” ii. p. 638.
[141] “Liber Albus,” ed. Riley, Introduction, p. lviii. Cf. the journey from Cambridge to York of a party of twenty-six scholars, in 1319. The beds, wherever they sleep, uniformly cost 8d. for the twenty-six. W. W. Rouse Ball, “Cambridge Papers,” London, 1918, ch. ix. “A Christmas Journey in 1319.”
[142] See Appendix IX.
[143] Published by Prof. Paul Meyer in the Revue Critique (1870), vol. x. p. 373.
[144] “Bon souper, bon gîte, et le reste” (La Fontaine).
[145] Riley’s “Memorials of London,” p. 386.
[146] Ed. Barack, Nurenberg, 1858; Fr. translation by Magnin, Paris, 1845.
[147] F. Michel and E. Fournier, “La Grande Bohème” I, pp. 200 ff.
[148] Furnivall, “Tale of Beryn,” Early English Text Society, 1887, p. viii., or Arber, “English Garner,” vi. 84.
“When all this ffreshe feleship were com to Cauntirbury . . .
They toke hir In, and loggit hem at mydmorrowe, I trowe,
Atte ‘Cheker of the hope,’ that many a man doith knowe.”
Prologue to the “Tale of Beryn.” E.E.T.S., 1909, p. 1.
[150] Statutes for the City of London, 13 Ed. I, “Statutes of the Realm,” vol. i. p. 102, A.D. 1285.
[151] Articles of the View of Frankpledge, of probably 18 Ed. II, “Statutes,” vol. i. p. 246 (French text).
[152] Hugh the needle-seller.
[153] “Piers the Plowman,” Skeat’s edition, Text C, passus vii. ll. 364–370, 394.
“Par ces tavernes chacun jour,
Vous en trouveriez à séjour,
Beuvans là toute la journée
Aussi tost que ont fait leur journée.
Maint y aconvient aler boire:
Là despendent, c’est chose voire,
Plus que toute jour n’ont gaigné.
•••••
Là ne convient il demander
S’ilz s’entrebatent quand sont yvres;
Le prévost en a plusieurs livres
D’amande tout au long de l’an.
•••••
Et y verriés de ces gallans
Oyseux qui tavernes poursuivent,
Gays et jolis.”
“Le Livre de la mutacion de fortune,” Bk. iii, MS. Fr. 603, Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris. Christine de Pisan’s “Œuvres poétiques,” are being published by the “Société de Anciens textes Français,” ed. Maurice Roy, 1886 ff.
[155] “Elynour Rummynge.” “Poetical Works of John Skelton,” ed. Dyce, 1843, vol. i. p. 95.
[156] Jurors find in 1375 that the bridge in the midst of the causey between Brant Broughton and Lincoln was primarily made “by a certain hermit after the first pestilence,” and consisted “in a board placed above the ford” which had to be waded through: “Jurati dicunt supra sacramentum suum . . . quod pons predictus post primam pestilenciam ibidem primo per quendam heremitum factus fuit, ponendo tabulam ultra quoddam vadum in medio calceti predicti.” Complete text in C. T. Flower, “Public Works in Mediæval Law,” Selden Society, 1915, i. 263.
[157] “Roman de Renart,” Branch viii. ed. Martin i. p. 267. On the outcome of this confession, see further, Part iii. chap. iii.
[158] The son of a mayor of York; d. about 1235. Miracles are said to have been worked at the Knaresborough hermitage, Yorkshire, where he had lived and was buried.
[159] “English Prose Treaties,” ed. Perry, E.E.T.S., 1866, pp. xv, xvi. Rolle died in 1349.
[160] Ibid. p. 5.
[161] Another example still in existence is the hermitage at Warkworth, Northumberland, partly of masonry and partly scooped out of the rock. It was apparently enlarged by its successive inhabitants, but seems from the style of the windows and carvings to belong mostly to the fourteenth century.
[162] “The Metrical Life of Saint Robert of Knaresborough,” ed. Haslewood and Douce, Roxburghe Club, 1824, p. 36. Cf. “Rotuli Chartarum in Turri Londinensi asservati,” ed. T. D. Hardy, 1837, p. 158, where King John is seen bestowing on one Robert, in 1205, “locum in quo heremitorium sancte Wereburge sedet” (the famous St. Werburga, abbess of Ely, seventh century). He does so “pro amore Dei et pro salute anime nostre.” He grants, “in puram et perpetuam elemosinam,” the “heremitorium de Godeland” to the monks of Whitby, Oct. 26, 1205, ibid, p. 159.
[163] Both sorts generally lived by themselves, but the recluse never left his cell while the hermit could roam about. “Issue Roll of Thomas de Brantingham,” ed. Devon, p. 393, 44 Ed. III; the same king gives also 20s. “in aid of her support” to “Alice de Latimer a recluse anchorite,” ibid. p. xxxvi.
[164] “Teste Rege, apud Westmonasterium, 1º die Octobris [1399].” Rymer’s “Fœdera.”
[165] See, for an example of a hermit settled at the corner of a bridge, an Act of resumption which formally excepts a grant of 14s. yearly to the “Heremyte of the Brigge of Loyne and his successours,” 4 Ed. IV, “Rolls of Parliament,” v. p. 546. Another example is to be found in J. Britton, “On Ancient Gate-houses,” “Memoirs illustrative of the History of Norfolk,” London, Archæological Institute, 1851, p. 137, where hermits are mentioned who lived on Bishop’s Bridge, Norwich, in the thirteenth century and after.
[166] See before, pp. [41] ff.
[167] See above as to the part taken by the clergy in the collection of offerings, and in the care and maintenance of bridges, chap. i.
[168] 12 Rich. II, chap. vii, “Statutes of the Realm.” A sample of a hermit’s vow, with an analysis of a fourteenth-century text describing the ceremony for the consecration of a hermit, is in E. L. Cutts, “Scenes and Characters of the Middle Ages,” 1872, pp. 98, 99. A list is given, p. 111, of the still subsisting English hermitages.
[169] “Piers Plowman,” Skeat’s edition, Text C, passus i. l. 30; passus x. l. 195.
[170] Ibid., passus x. l. 188.
[171] Look humbly to gain alms.
[172] “Piers Plowman,” Skeat’s edition, Text C, passus x. ll. 140–152.
[173] Text C, passus x. ll. 251–256.
“Li abis ne fet pas l’ermite;
S’uns hom en hermitage abite
Et s’il en a les dras vestus,
Je ne pris mie deus festus
Son abit ne sa vesteure,
S’il ne maine vie aussi pure
Comme son abit nous démonstre;
Mes maintes genz font bele monstre
Et merveilleux sanblant qu’il vaillent:
Il sanblent les arbres qui faillent
Qui furent trop bel au florir.”
Le Dit de frère Denise. “Œuvres complètes de Rutebeuf,” ed. Jubinal, Paris, 1874, vol. ii. p. 63.
[175] Printed in the “Archæological Journal,” vol. iv. p. 69.
[176] “E, sire, les avant ditz William e Richart e plusours gentz de la ville de Lichfield sount menacé des ditz larons e lour maintenours qu’ils n’osent nule part aler hors de la dite ville.”
[177] Richard II had several times to renew and confirm them, but without effect. In his first statute upon this subject he condemns the superabundance of retainers which many men, though of indifferent means, delight in; he declares “that divers people of small revenue of land, rent, or other possessions, do make great retinue of people, as well of esquires as of other, in many parts of the realm” (1 Richard II, cap. 7, A.D. 1377). The third statute of 13 Richard II, that of his 16th year (cap. 4), that of his 20th year (cap. 1 and 2), are likewise directed against the abuse of liveries and the number of retainers of the “lords spiritual and temporal.” Henry VI renewed these statutes, also without result.
[178] 10 Ed. III, year 1336.
[179] Those who divided among themselves the prospective profit of a lawsuit “maintained” in this way, were called “champertors,” campi participes, which was forbidden by numerous statutes. See e.g. the “Ordinacio de Conspiratoribus,” 33 Ed. I, year 1305.
[180] 4 Ed. III, chap. 2, year 1330.
[181] 20 Ed. III, chap. 4, 5, 6, year 1346.
[182] “Le Roi désire que commun droit soit fait à toutz, auxibien à povres come à riches.” 1 Ed. III, stat. ii, ch. 14.
[183] In the petition to the Good Parliament, 1376, she is included among “les femmes qui ont pursuys en les Courtz du Roi diverses busoignes et quereles par voie de maintenance et pur lower (gain) et part avoir.”
[184] Statute 2 Richard II, stat. i. cap. 6, A.D. 1378.
[185] The picture in this statute is so complete that there is scarcely need to quote other texts; they are, however, numerous. In the petitions to parliament will be found many complaints by private people for acts of violence of which they had been victims, for imprisonment by their enemies, robberies, arson, destruction of game or fish in the parks. Examples: petition of Agnes Atte Wode, she and her son beaten and robbed (ibid. i. p. 372); of Agnes of Aldenby, beaten by malefactors (“Rolls of Parliament,” i. p. 375); of the inhabitants of several towns of the county of Hertford, who have been imprisoned and forced to pay ransom by the knight John of Patmer (i. p. 389); of John of Grey, who was attacked by fifteen malefactors so resolute as to set fire to a town and storm a castle (i. p. 397); of Robert Power, who is robbed and his mansion sacked, his people beaten, by “men all armed as men of war” (i. p. 410); of Ralph le Botiller, who has seen his mansion pillaged and burnt by eighty men, who came with arms and baggage, bringing ropes and hatchets on carts (ii. p. 88), etc. In France, it is well known, the misdeeds of this kind were still more numerous but then a continual state of war was raging there.
[186] “Rolls of Parliament,” ii. p. 351.
[187] One founded with that object by Matthew of Dunstable in 1295, and “known as the chantry of Biddenham bridge in Bromham parish.” “Victoria History of the Counties of England,” Bedfordshire, vol. iii. p. 49.
[188] “Statutes of the Realm,” year 1285.
[189] “Chronica Monasterii de Melsa,” Rolls Series, ii. 275.
[190] “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 201 (22 E. III, 1348).
[191] Ibid., vol. ii. p. 165.
[192] Earliest reference in England: that in the laws of Ethelbert, King of Kent, later part of the sixth century, where it is said that “the penalty for violation of church frith is to be twice that exacted for an ordinary breach of peace.” Trenholme, “The Right of Sanctuary in England,” University of Missouri Studies, 1903, p. 11.
[193] Trenholme, as above, p. 48.
[194] R. W. Billings, “Architectural Illustrations . . . of the Church at Durham,” London, 1843, p. 20.
[195] “Erant hujusmodi cathedrarum multæ in Anglia . . . Beverlaci autem celeberrima, quæ priscorum regum benignitate (puta Æthelstani vel alterius cujuspiam) asyli nacta privilegium, tali honestabatur inscriptione: ‘Hæc sedes lapidea Freedstoll dicitur, i.e. pacis cathedra, ad quam reus fugiendo perveniens, omnimodam habet securitatem.’” H. Spelman, “Glossarium Archaiologicum,” 3rd ed., London, 1687, p. 248.
[196] Though every consecrated place was a sanctuary, some of them afforded far more safety than others, the penalties for abductors being much greater. A list of the safest of the English sanctuaries is in S. Pegge, “A Sketch of the History of the Asylum or Sanctuary,” in “Archæologia,” 1787, vol. viii. p. 41.
[197] “Brevis annotatio Ricardi, prioris Hagustaldensis ecclesiæ de antiquo et moderno statu ejusdem ecclesiæ,” ed. Raine, “The priory of Hexham,” Surtees Society, 1864–5, 2 vols. illustrated, i. 62. The prior has also a chapter v, “De pace inviolabili per unum milliare circumquaque ipsius ecclesiæ,” p. 19, and a chapter xiv on the privileges, granted by the king, to the Hexham Sanctuary, p. 61.
[198] Raine, as above, II, p. lxiv. Wright’s “Essay” appeared in 1823.
[199] Usually worn by the accused, but the law officer’s intrusion would have made him a guilty man. “Carcannum,” says Du Cange, “collistrigium, vinculum quo rei collum stringitur, nostris, carcan.”
[200] J. Raine, “Sanctuarium Dunelmense et Sanctuarium Beverlacense,” London, Surtees Society, 1827, p. xxv.
[201] See Appendix X, p. [434].
[202] “Sanctuarium Dunelmense et Sanctuarium Beverlacense,” p. 111.
[203] Penance of this kind was not applied only to men. Women of all ranks were obliged to submit to it. In the same Register Palatine of Durham may be seen the case of Isabella of Murley, condemned for adultery with her sister’s husband, John d’Amundeville, to receive publicly “six whippings around the market of Durham” (vol. ii. p. 695). The case was not one of people of the lower sort; the Amundeville family was powerful and old-established in the county. Particulars about them from the thirteenth century may be found in Surtees, “History and Antiquities of the County Palatine of Durham,” London, 1823, vol. iii. p. 270. Another example is in the “Constitutiones . . . Walteri de Cantilupo” (Bishop of Worcester), A.D. 1240; Wilkins’ “Concilia Magnæ Britanniæ et Hiberniæ,” London, 1757, vol. i. p. 668.
[204] “Registrum Palatinum Dunelmense,” ed. Sir T. D. Hardy, London, 1875, vol. i. p. 315, A.D. 1313.
[205] Henry IV or Henry V. Raine, “Sanctuarium Dunelmense,” p. xvii.
[206] “Historical Notices of the Collegiate Church or Royal free Chapel and Sanctuary of St. Martin le Grand, London,” by A. J. Kempe, London, 1825, p. 136.
[207] “Croniques de London,” edited by G. J. Aungier, Camden Society, 1844, p. 48; written by a contemporary of the events.
[208] “Articuli cleri,” statute 9 E. II, cap. 10.
[209] He forbids those on guard to stay in the cemetery, unless there is imminent danger of flight. The felon may have the “necessaries of life” in the sanctuary.
[210] “Statutes of the Realm,” i. p. 250, text of uncertain date, but probably of the reign of Edward II. All this was classified as “Abuses” by the not very trustworthy author of the “Mirror for Justices” (Andrew Horne?), early fourteenth century, ed. Whittaker and Maitland, Selden Soc., 1895, p. 158. At all events it was the law. According to “Fleta,” lib. i. cap. xxix, at the end of forty days in sanctuary, if the malefactors have not abjured the kingdom, food must be refused to them, and they will no longer be allowed to emigrate. On the road to the port, according to the same, the felon wore a garb which would cause him to be recognized, being “ungirt, un-shod, bare-headed, in his bare shirt, as if he were to be hanged on the gallows, having received a cross in his hands,” “discinctus et discalceatus, capite discooperto, in pura tunica, tanquam in patibulo suspendendus, accepta cruce in manibus.” “Fleta” stated that he must try to cross, till he got into water, not up to the knees, but up to the neck. On the “Abjuratio Regni,” see the capital article, with a complete bibliography of the subject by André Réville, in the “Revue Historique,” Sept. 1892.
[211] “The Sanctuaries and Sanctuary Seekers of Mediæval England,” by the Rev. J. Charles Cox, quoting a coroner’s roll of the time of Edward III. London, 1911, p. 28.
[212] Statute 2 Rich. II, stat. 2, chap. 3. These frauds had been already complained of under Edward III. A petition of the Commons in the parliament of 1376–77 (“Rolls of Parliament,” ii. p. 369), declares that certain people, after having received money or merchandise on loan, and having made a pretended gift of all their property to friends, “flee to Westminster, St. Martin’s, or other such privileged places, and lie there a long time, . . . so long that the said creditors are only too pleased to take a small part of their debt and release the rest.” Then the debtors return home, and their friends give them back their property.
[213] See Appendix X, p. [435].
[214] A. J. Kempe, “Historical Notices of . . . St. Martin le Grand,” London, 1825, p. 135.
[215] Statute 9 Ed. II, cap. 15.
[216] “Croniques de London,” Camden Society, 1884, p. 42.
[217] See Appendix X.
[218] “Croniques de London,” Camden Society, 1844, p. 52.
[219] “The History of King Richard the Thirde (unfinished), writen by Master Thomas More, than one of the Under Sherriffs of London: about the yeare of our Lorde, 1513,” “Workes,” London, 1557. Reprinted by S. W. Singer, Chiswick, 1821, p. 55.
[220] “The History of King Richard the Thirde,” pp. 44, 45. A list of the “contents” of the same Westminster sanctuary, in 1532, has been printed by the Rev. J. C. Cox, showing that “there were then fifty fugitives, including one woman under the protection of the abbey, as life prisoners, one of whom had been there for twenty years. Sixteen were there for felonies, probably all robberies, eleven for murder or homicide, eighteen for debt, and two for sacrilege,” the church having particular merit in protecting the latter. One was a priest: “Sir James Whytakere, preste, for murdre”; some were there for a matter so small as to inspire pity: “John ap Howell for felony; a poore mane, for stellynge of herrings.” “Sanctuaries,” 1911, pp. 72 ff.
[221] “History of the reign of King Henry VII,” Ellis and Spedding’s edition of Bacon’s Works, vol. vi. p. 43. Bacon says that Henry “was tender in the privilege of sanctuaries, though they wrought him much mischief” (p. 238).
[222] 21 James I, cap. 28, § 7; “Statutes,” vol. iv. part ii. p. 1237.
[223] “Rolls of Parliament,” 21 Ed. III, vol. ii. p. 178. See also the petition of the Commons in 1350–51, 25 Ed. III, vol. ii. p. 229.
[224] “Our lord the king by untrue recommendations has several times granted his charter of pardon to notorious robbers and to common murderers, when it is given him to understand that they are staying for his wars beyond the sea, whence they suddenly return into their country to persevere in their misdeeds.” The king orders that on the charter shall be written “the name of him who made the recommendation to the king;” the judges before whom this charter shall be presented by the felon to have his liberty shall have the power to make inquiry, and if they find that the recommendation is not well founded, they shall hold the charter of non effect. “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 253, A.D. 1353.
[225] Regulations of 1313. “Munimenta Academica; or documents illustrative of academical life and studies at Oxford,” edited by H. Anstey, London, 1868, Rolls Series, vol. i. p. 91. The penalty was prison and the loss of the weapons.
[226] 5 Edward III, cap. 14.
[227] A characteristic example of thief-catching, the man being a vagabond, is in Thorold Rogers: William atte Lane had “feloniously bereft Richard [de Herbarton] of a striped gown, worth ten shillings.” Richard ran after him, “cum hutesio et clamore,” and the man was caught “by the bailiff of the liberty of Holywell, Oxford.” William pleaded not guilty and asked for a jury, “ponit se super patriam.” The jury found him guilty, ordered that he restitute the gown to Richard, and as he had no goods to make atonement, and was “a vagabond belonging to no ward,” he be hanged, “suspendatur,” (Dec. 8, 1337); the marginal note “susp.” shows that he was actually hanged. “Hist. of Agriculture,” ii. 665.
[228] Statute of Winchester, 13 Ed. I, cap. 4.
[229] “Clamor patriæ” in the Latin texts, “Fleta” for example; “clameur de haro” in France, where the practice existed even before the time of Childebert, sixth century, and was still in use, in Normandy at least, until the Revolution. See above, p. 114, [note 1].
[230] This power of running down the first comer was, like many practices of the time, at once a guarantee for public safety and a dangerous arm in the hands of felons. Robbers used it, and it happened sometimes that they imprisoned by this means their own victims. Alisot, wife of Henry of Upatherle, sets forth to the king that her husband was made prisoner by the Scotch at the battle of Stirling, remained their captive more than a year, then returned after having paid forty pounds ransom. In his absence, Thomas of Upatherle and Robert of Prestbury seized on the fields which he possessed at Upatherle, divided them, pulled down the houses and acted as the owners, taking to their own homes all the goods they could move. The prisoner’s return surprised them; as soon as they knew that he had re-appeared on his lands, “the said Thomas, by false agreement between him and the said Robert, raised hue and cry on the said Henry and put upon him that he had robbed him (Thomas) of his chattels to the value of £100.” They were believed; “the said Henry was taken and imprisoned in Gloucester castle for a long time,” waiting for the coming of the justices, exactly as the statute said. Henry recovered his liberty in the end, and obtained a writ against his enemies; but they brought force and came to meet their victim, “and beat the said Henry in the town of Gloucester, that is they bruised his two arms, both his thighs, and both his legs, and his head on both sides, and quite wrecked and vilely treated his body, so that he barely escaped death.” The king’s reply is not satisfactory: “If the husband be alive, the plaint is his, if he be dead the wife’s plaint is nothing.” “Rolls of Parliament,” vol. ii. p. 35, A.D. 1330.