he says. And have etc. Thus an action lies for the chief lord by reason of escheat and  wardship. Since no ordinary remedy lies for him, since he can [not] speak of his own  seisin or that of his ancestor, recourse must of necessity be had to an extraordinary,  to these writs specially drawn, for any right belonging to him.1
The writ of intrusion.
 [The king to the sheriff etc. Put C. etc.] to show why he intruded himself into so  much land etc. which B. claims to hold of C. son and heir of D. who in her liege power  gave that land to the aforesaid B. with the assent and agreement of the aforesaid  C. her son and heir, and that of the said A. the chief lord of that land, as [B.] says.  Or in another form:
The writ why he intruded himself.
 [The king to the sheriff etc. Put B. etc. to show] why he intruded himself into so much  land etc. which the same B. claims against the aforesaid A. by our writ of right in such  a court, as to which the same A. put himself upon our grand assise and sued out our  writ for having our peace until the arrival of the justices in those parts, into which  they have not yet come, as the same A. says. Or in another form:
Another form of the same.
 [The king to the sheriff etc. Put A. etc. to show] why he intruded himself into so much  land etc. which ought to revert to the said B. after the death of [D.], who held that  land in dower of the gift of such a one, by reason of a fine levied between the aforesaid  B. and such a one, the ancestor of the said A., whose heir A. is, as [B.] says. This form  of the writ lies whenever one has intruded into land held for life (in dower, by the law  of England, or in any other way) which, at the death of the life tenant ought to revert  to the true heir, or to others, by a fine levied or in some other way.2 If such [tenants]  alien in their lifetimes a writ of entry will lie, as will be explained below.
If a man remains in possession after the death of his wife.
 A man may hold himself in seisin as [tenant] by the law of England after the death of  his wife though no children were born of the marriage. Let this writ then issue: [Because  possession sometimes gives birth to right3 and is taken to be dejure, let the true  heir eject the intruder within a year at most, or if [he cannot], proceed against him by  writ, because for a more distant intrusion no answer will be made him, as [in the roll]  of Michaelmas term in the ninth and the beginning of the tenth years of king Henry  in the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, [the case] of Simon de Cockefeld,4 [where it was  said] that after a long time, that is, ten or twelve years, the question of intrusion may  not be raised, neither by writ nor without it. If the intruder is ejected quickly, within  a year according to some, before he has
1. de iure aliqui sibi competente, as infra 214; Aliud de eodem: rubric