Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 3, Page 359  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] she has a husband and cannot sue without him, or if she sues with him [or] has no
[002] husband,1 that she cannot sue without the warrantor of her dower.]

Of claiming the view.

[004] The woman's intentio having thus been put forward, the tenant may well claim the
[005] view, if he so wishes, by simply saying ‘I claim the view’ or ‘I claim the view of so
[006] much land of which such a one claims the third part in dower.’ If he says ‘I claim the
[007] view of the third part which such a one claims in dower,’ the view will be denied him.2
[008] After the view claimed, an essoin will lie, as in other pleas. And after the essoin and
[009] lawful delays, the tenant may either vouch a warrantor, if he has a warrantor, or
[010] answer in his own person and raise exceptions, if he has such. If he vouches a warrantor,
[011] let the writ for summoning the warrantor be in this form. 3<[And so] if he does
[012] not know how to name the warrantor, as in the eyre of Martin of Pateshull in the
[013] county of Suffolk in the twelfth year, [the case] of Agnes, the wife of Robert Ruffus,
[014] and Robert of Barnes, [where] the woman recovered dower at once and the tenant in
[015] mercy.>4

If the tenant vouches a warrantor.

[017] ‘The king to the sheriff, greeting. Summon D. of N. by good summoners to be before
[018] our justices etc. on such a day to warrant to A. the third part [of so much land] (or
[019] ‘so much land with the appurtenances’) in such a vill which B. who was the wife of
[020] C. in our court before our justices etc. claims in dower against the aforesaid A., as
[021] to which the same A. in our court before our same justices vouched the same D. to
[022] warranty against the aforesaid B. And have there the summoners and this writ.
[023] Witness etc.' On which day each may essoin himself, [as elsewhere [in the portion]
[024] on warrantors.]5

If he has no warrantor.

[026] But if the tenant has no warrantor, let him then either restore dower to the womandemandant
[027] or raise exceptions, if it appears that they are available to him. First
[028] let him raise those exceptions against the writ which are common to all pleas, as
[029] where error is found and the like; then let exceptions particular to this writ be
[030] raised, as where she has part of her dower; the writ [then] falls,6 7<as in the eyre of
[031] Martin of Pateshull in the county of York in the third year of king Henry [the case]
[032] of Alice the wife of Adam son of Peter,8 and to the same intent in the same eyre [in
[033] the county of Worcester, the case] of Alice the wife of Hugh de Alencester,9 and
[034] elsewhere throughout,> since the phrase ‘quod nihil habet’ is contained in the writ,
[035] for a lying suppliant ought not to have what is sought.10 Nor ought the replication
[036] to avail the woman demandant that though she has her dower in another vill she has
[037] nothing in this vill, since the word ‘nothing’ refers to her entire


1. ‘virum’ for ‘probationem’

2. Infra iv, 182

3. Supra i, 408; addicio supra 358, n. 4 belongs here

4. B.N.B., no. 1937

5. Infra iv, 201

6. Infra 396

7. Supra i, 409

8. Selden Soc. vol. 56, xiv, nos. 132, 183, 205; ‘filii’

9. Selden Soc. vol. 53, no. 1030 (Worcester 1221, not Yorks. 1218-19)

10. Decretum: C. 25, qu. 2, ca.16: ‘Mendax enim precator debet carere impetratis’

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