Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 3, Page 397  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] much difference whether it was before impetration or after. But if she does not name
[002] him in the writ and, an exception being raised, says that the exception ought not to
[003] hurt her because she has nothing in that vill, though she has in such other, her
[004] replication will not be effective because what is said [in the writ], ‘whereof she has
[005] nothing,’ must be taken to refer not to vills but to dower.1 Hence if she says that she
[006] has nothing in such a vill her replication is valueless, unless she can show that she
[007] has nothing in the name of dower anywhere. And when the woman by replicating
[008] denies that she has anything, a denial by wager of law will not lie, but let the truth
[009] be inquired into by the country.2

Of the woman's replication.

[011] She may also replicate that if she has something, she has nothing in the name of
[012] dower, but in another way, as by reason of wardship and the like. And if need be
[013] let an inquest thereon be held in the county court, whether she, as3 is said, has
[014] received anything in the name of dower, in these words, namely, ‘if she holds anything
[015] in the name of dower of the tenement which was her husband's, and if she had
[016] some part and now does not have it, what she did therewith, and let the sheriff send
[017] the inquest,’ as [in the roll] of Trinity term in the fourth year of king Henry in the
[018] county of Norfolk, [the case] of Isolda the wife of William.4

If the land from which she claims dower had been granted at farm and for a term.

[020] If the land from which the woman claims dower has been given at farm and for a
[021] term of years, when she has recovered the third part in the name of dower the judge
[022] acting ex officio will permit the farmer to retain the two parts beyond his term, until
[023] he has taken therefrom to the value of the lost third part, as [in the roll] of Michaelmas
[024] term of the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth years of king Henry in
[025] the counties of Suffolk and Essex, [the case] of Emma the wife of Roger the son of
[026] Swayn.5 And to the same intent [in the roll] of Michaelmas term of the ninth and the
[027] beginning of the tenth years of king Henry in the county of Northampton, [the case]
[028] of Margery the wife of Henry of Norton.6 Here it is always necessary to ascertain
[029] the value of the third part by a reasonable extent. Let it be done thus unless she was
[030] endowed specifically of the whole, for then she will recover the whole as her specified
[031] dower and the farmer, if the charter for the term cannot be denied, will recover
[032] land to the value of that claimed from the land of the warrantor, by direction of the
[033] judge acting ex officio, [to be held] until the completion of his term, or7 until the full
[034] age of the warrantor, if he is within age, or if of full age, until he can deliver the land
[035] which the woman


1. Supra 360; B.N.B., no. 101 (margin): ‘Exceptio contra dotem unde nichil habet etc. et responsio quod nichil habet in tali villa, non valet, quia haberi debet respectus ad dotem et non ad villam.’

2. Om: ‘De replicatione mulieris,’ rubric

3. ‘ipsa ut’

4. B.N.B., no. 83 (Hil. and Easter 4); C.R.R., viii, 200

5. C.R.R., xiv, no. 937; not in B.N.B. Also B.N.B., nos. 658, 767

6. C.R.R., xii, no. 726; not in B.N.B.; Hall in E.H.R., lxxiv, 107

7. ‘vel’

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