Harvard Law School Library

Bracton Online -- English

Previous   Volume 4, Page 218  Next    

Go to Volume:      Page:    

[001] If the charter is adequate and genuine, the exception that it was made while the donor
[002] was not of sound mind or sound memory may be urged against it, which may be
[003] proved by the witnesses named in the charter and by the country. How this ought to
[004] be proved will be explained more fully below in the title on warranty of charter.1

When one is not bound to warrant.

[006] The warrantor may also except against the tenant who vouched that though the
[007] charter of feoffment is good the gift is invalid, because the donee who proffers the
[008] charter, or his ancestor to whom the gift was said to be made, never had seisin of the
[009] land during the donor's lifetime,2 only by intrusion after his death, because of which
[010] the vouchee intends to claim it in demesne on the seisin of his ancestor, who died
[011] seised thereof as of fee.

The exception that the donor was never in seisin.

[013] He may also except that [his] ancestor, who is alleged to have made the gift, was never
[014] in such seisin of it that he could make a gift. A charter, which is only the vestment of a
[015] gift, may be good and the gift bad for want of seisin, and conversely the gift may be
[016] good and the charter bad,3 and sometimes both may be bad and thus both void. Hence
[017] if a charter of gift is put forward, the warrantor must deny both, that is, the charter
[018] and the gift, and thus the tenant must prove both, because of the copulative put between
[019] them. Hence if he fails in the proof of one, he ought to be treated as if he has
[020] failed in the proof of both. For it is not enough to prove the charter valid if the gift is
[021] incomplete. He who admits the gift is bound to warrant, though he may show that the
[022] charter is defective or forged, because a gift may be valid though no charter is made,
[023] as [in the roll] of the eyre of William of Ralegh in the county of Buckingham, [the
[024] case] of Alice de Roche.4 Though a gift is invalid at the outset for want of seisin, it
[025] may later be cured by the heir, as where, when the donee is in seisin in some way, and
[026] after the right has descended to the heir,5 he acknowledges his father's charter and
[027] gift and takes the donee's homage, or confirms his father's gift; he cannot claim that
[028] land in demesne but is bound to warrant it against others, as [in the roll] of the eyre of
[029] Martin of Pateshull and his companions in divers counties after


1. Infra 235 ff.

2. Supra ii, 120, infra 240

3. Supra ii, 50

4. Not in B.N.B.; roll extant

5. Supra 215

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