Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 4, Page 180  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] Such are almost all exceptions arising out of the preliminaries of judicial actions,
[002] 1<In truth if the proper order of putting forward exceptions is observed, he ought
[003] first to put those forward which lie2 against the jurisdiction of the judge, then
[004] against3 the persons of the parties and other matters which are dilatory, as summonses
[005] and calling to court and the like, then against the editio actionis,4 and then
[006] first, that a thing certain may be brought before the court, [claim the view].> [before]
[007] claiming the view.5 But since it would be onerous to discuss each exception in
[008] its proper place and by itself, it will be easier and more useful, as is evident, to collect
[009] them all in one bundle, so to speak, and treat them all together in order. Therefore
[010] omitting here the tractate on exceptions, let us treat of claiming the view.

On claiming the view and why the view is to be made.

[012] [The view is made] that a thing certain be brought before the court, that is, that the
[013] demandant show the tenant the thing certain for which he intends to sue,6 7[The
[014] view is sometimes made to the party, sometimes to the jurors,8 as in the assises in
[015] a possessory action, sometimes in inquests with respect to things as to which the
[016] parties disagree, as9 a place, or an act, as in trespasses.]10 nor does it matter whether
[017] he makes a view to the adverse party11 of the thing claimed or does what amounts
[018] to it, provided that a thing certain is designated,12 by certain bounds or13 by a
[019] recital of places and names.

Of making the view or what amounts to it: to whom it is made and to whom not.

[021] Let us first see to whom the view is to be made, to whom denied, and where it does
[022] not lie. It is clear that, having seen where it does not lie and to whom it is denied,
[023] for whom it does lie will be evident. The view is denied the tenant in a plea de proparte
[024] sororum, even though a manor with the appurtenances is named in the writ,
[025] because sister claiming against sister cannot designate or specify which portion
[026] ought to fall to her in purparty; furthermore14 she claims nothing other than the
[027] rightful portion which falls to her from the whole land which the sister-parceners
[028] hold of the common inheritance, ‘of which the father or other common ancestor
[029] died seised as of fee,’ though it could be objected, so it seems, that others hold part
[030] of the same inheritance, of which he, the tenant, has nothing in demesne or in
[031] service.15


1. Supra i, 416

2. ‘competunt’

3. ‘contra,’ as infra 246

4. Infra 352; D. 2.13; C. 2.1

5. ‘ante visum petendum,’ as infra 246

6. ‘ostendat tenenti rem certam de qua’

7. This portion belongs infra at n. 11

8. ‘iuratoribus’

9. ‘ut’

10. Infra 184

11. Supra n. 7

12. ‘designetur’

13. ‘vel’

14. ‘praeterea’

15. Infra 189; om: ‘Et est . . . ad partem suam,’ redundant

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