does it matter, so far as restitution is concerned, whether he has a right in the thing  or not, as long as he has been despoiled contrary to the order of law, or, without judgment.  And in another place, if possession comes to the true lord by violence, that is,  by force and without judgment, and where he ought to sue by action he makes himself  judge and ejects his disseisor, the possessor in bad faith, that is, the disseisor, without  distinguishing further, that is, despite any exception raised by the true lord, will  regain the advantage of possession.1 And in another place, 2that a lord who ejects or  despoils is required to restore possession to him he ejects, though he possesses by  force, stealth or at will from him who has ejected.3 And in another place, that 4he who  has secured possession from me by force, that is, by disseisin, [if] he is despoiled by  another, who has no right, will have restitution by the assise.]5 The penalty of the  spoliator, if the thing is his own whose seisin he usurped to himself without judgment,  [will be]6 that he restore it with the issues taken and to be taken,7 hardly to be heard  later on the question of property.8 If it is the other's, let him restore it in the same  way, never to be heard subsequently either on the possession or on the property.
[An exception is given a tenant by reason of the tenement.]9  An exception often lies for a tenant against a plaintiff by reason of the tenement, as  where not the plaintiff but another has the free tenement, as where a guardian or  farmer, a creditor or villein complains and seeks restitution by the assise; it does not  lie for them but for the owner in whose name they are in possession, because the exception  of free tenement nullifies their action.10 An exception also lies for a tenant by  reason of the tenement for a thing which is sacred and holy, as places dedicated to  God, which cannot be possessed by anyone.11 Therefore the assise lies for no one and,  since here the assise falls, not the writ, it is turned into a jury to inquire into the  trespass, whether such has been committed in a sacred thing, of which there can be  no disseisin, in order that the trespass be amended by the jury, and both, the plaintiff  as well as the trespasser, [be] in mercy: the plaintiff for his false claim, the trespasser  for his trespass. [And so] if the tenement is the property of a universitas or public,  within the city or borough [If [it is a royal or public road and] it is built upon or encroached  upon, correction will belong to the lord king. It will be a trespass and purpresture  rather than a disseisin; if it is a public or royal road outside the city or  borough, correction will likewise belong to the king.]12 [or] outside